But is she deeply disturbed or merely disturbed? Because Mitt Romney is always deeply concerned before he does absolutely nothing. I am certain that Susan Collins is contemplating how concerned or disturbed she is as she approaches her campaign. I enjoy the theater, but this act is getting to be a bit of a yawn.
12
"A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate?" All Senator Murkowski is is merely this year's Jeff Flake. She's someone who criticizes her Republican Party, but, at the end of day, when she has to cast a vote, will likely not go against it.
10
A Stirring Conscience in the Senate? Was there a "stirring of conscience" in the House?
Amazingly, the House majority Democrats…led by Nancy Pelosi…have somehow managed to convince virtually half the nation that President Trump is a racist, a fascist, a serial criminal, and lo and behold...an undercover agent to Vladimir Putin. Now...if that isn’t a gullible mouthful, then I don’t know what is! This only illustrates the power of political persuasion ...subliminal and otherwise...aided and abetted by an entrenched mainstream media and a so-called “progressive” pop-culture which permeates throughout our society.
As the old adage goes, “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” – Joseph Goebbels
3
A stirring of Conscience. Wish all those in DC on both sides of the isle had a stirring of conscience, and an appreciation for the rule of law. Since November 2016 the Dems have called for impeachment of Trump. Endlessly. I do not like Trump, not how he rambles and cannot complete a sentence, not his 100 word vocabulary (okay, if you're not President), and don't agree with many policies, especially those on taxes and the environment.
But, and this is a big BUT, I cannot for the life of me understand how viewers can objectively look at the testimonies during house inquiry and honestly believe that their is evidence, outside opinion and 'we hate him, so' to impeach. And I do not understand how Schiff can subpeana private citizen phone calls and text messages and then make them public without Democrats claiming foul, at a minimum.
The Reps may be blindly supporting a man we all know most dislike, but the Dems are turning a blind eye to breaking the law and legitimate evidence because the ends justify the means. For me, this is far more egregious and destructive to the United States than anything one man named Trump has or can do to this nation. We have checks and balances, but our representatives are to uphold the law above all. And just picking those they like will not do.
2
@Ma
The evidence that Trump held military aid to Ukraine and a White House visit to the President of Ukraine is already overwhelming. Here is additional testimony from Trump officials that we were not able to hear from because they were prevented by the President from testifying. Instead of further dragging the process through the courts, Trump was impeached on the basis of the evidence presented.
We should hear from these officials in the Senate trial and not allow Trump to escape justice.
7
We can't have a trial if Pelosi won't refer the matter to the Senate. She told us all how it critical it was to have a speedy impeachment process in the House because Trump was such a danger to America. But apparently not too much of a danger though since now she's sitting on the impeachment. Which is it? Murkowski is certainly not a GOP role model either. Democrats should take no comfort in her behavior.
Republican politicians should understand that, at some point in the future Mr. Trump will be out of office. When that occurs, if they have remained in lockstep with him, despite his obvious lawlessness, they will have no standing as independent lawmakers: their party will have to disintegrate and reform itself if it is to survive.
If, on the other hand, they choose to disengage from Trump, they can reclaim their names as Republicans rather than Trumpers. A bully succeeds only when not confronted.
Will that happen? Who knows? We live in interesting times, and Trump's position is historically unique: he is the only President impeached who can run for re-election.
5
QUOTE: A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate – At least one Republican, Lisa Murkowski, wants the Trump impeachment trial to be more than a test of party loyalty. Others should follow.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT: Why wasn’t the impeachment hearing led by Democratic House majority more than just a "test of party loyalty"? Why wasn’t there a “stirring of conscience” in the House…as opposed to the pre-ordained kangaroo court that actually took place?
Curious (and intellectually honest) minds need to know!
1
Is the title of this article a sick joke? No senate Republican has one ounce of ethics or morality in them. If they did they would have quit the party long ago.
8
One person with a conscience will not change the Republican party. Until they are demolished in the voting booths of America they will continue in their awful ways.
5
December 29, 2019
Well in for sure Trump will response with his usual lack of diplomacy - to say: Lock her Up.
Let's keep this most likely communication as a further exhibit of failure to honor his oath of the Presidency -
Ergo DJT can look for new construction project - maybe the Ukraine is nice - or say North North Korea before it is blown away by endless nuke playground to his neighborhood -
JJA
1
Sorry NY Times, the only stirring of conscience worth noting is -- appropriately -- among Democratic Senators who are realizing how weak and ridiculous the "charges" are. Most astute political observers expect several Democrats with a conscience to vote against impeachment, bringing this sad waste of time to its ignominious end.
Murkowski can stir all she wants (and I applaud her for doing so), but the GOP ingredient stew is filled with anti-democracy power-obsessed cheaters. To think that enough in the party could suddenly find a conscience is a fool's errand.
4
I continue to think Nancy Pelosi should wait to see how rigged the Senate trial will be. If Mitch has the votes for another travesty along the lines of the Kavanaugh proceedings, then she should withhold the impeachment articles and ask the Supreme Court for an expedited ruling on subpoenas for all relevant witnesses and documents yet to be produced. That’s their job and there’s no reason to dawdle or deflect from their duty to settle the most important disagreements between the other two branches of government.
Meanwhile, the House can continue to investigate the Trump administration. I would consider adding additional articles of impeachment for obstructing justice as detailed in the Mueller investigation. I would subpoena Trump for public testimony under oath, something akin to what Republicans made Secretary Clinton do about Benghazi and president Clinton do in the Paula Jones civil suit.
Hopefully, ongoing pressure on Trump will force him to avoid additional illegal or unconstitutional behavior. If it doesn’t, there’s always room for more impeachment articles.
6
"The senator is sending a message, to her constituents as well as to Mr. McConnell, that she does not want to be viewed as a rubber stamp for a preordained acquittal."
Wonderful but there do not appear to be enough supporters of her "concerns" to step up. McConnell has turned his back on his oath of office as have most of Trump's Republican lad dogs. I appreciate Ms. Murkowski's concerns but I hate to see them go unsupported by the rest of her fellow senators.
3
A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate? Don't hold your breath.
3
What has happened to this once great paper.
2
Oh, she's not going to convict.
What I don't understand is how any senator can let Trump off the hook when we all know he may well do something so egregious that his acquittal will look like a gross miscarriage of justice.
Fool me 15,000 times, shame on you.
Fool me 15,001 times, shame on Congress.
4
Not only will more info trickle out with books and investigation, but Trump won't stop acting out.
Some brave advisor may tell him that he dodged the bullet, so please lay low and be nice until the election. But he won't be able to do this and he will do or say something nasty.
2
A sad day in America when partisan politics, er, trumps the rule of law. Concerns about a fair trial are premature. Speaker Pelosi is either unmindful or ignorant of the speedy trial guarantee of the Sixth Amendment. If Trump has committed high crimes and misdemeanors" as charged, then he is entitled to its protection and not the stonewalling in which she is engaging.
32
@wlt. The Senate is on recess until after the new year. It makes literally no difference at all where the Impeachment paperwork resides. There will be no movement while Congress is closed. So Trump is not being denied anything.
276
@wlt
A speedy trial can only be had in an honest court. If the court itself is trying to corrupt the prosecution of the case in collusion with the defense that is a crime in itself and surely mitigates if not outright removes the right to speedy trial from this case.
220
@wlt The Sixth amendment only applies to criminal trials held in a court of law. It does not apply to impeachment in the Senate which is a political activity.
You bemoan how partisan politics trumps the rule of law. However, what about Senator's Mitch Mconnell and Lindsay Grahm who have already announced that they will not be impartial and thus will be in violation of the oath every senator must take prior to participating in consideration of impeachment.
395
The election is 11 months away—you really don’t like or trust the citizens, do you?
32
I have no problem with US citizens exercising their franchise. I do have a major problem with Republicans using every disgusting tactic in the book to suppress votes and rig the outcome. I’m also deeply concerned that one or more foreign entities, with Trump’s knowing acquiescence, will tamper with the election to keep him in office. Four more years of unrestrained Trumpism will destroy our country at home and turn the world over to the worst kleptocrats and autocrats.
6
In my nearly 70 years I have never been witness to such a pathetic display of blind loyalty as has been displayed by Senator McConnell.
President Trump is like no president that has ever held the nation's highest office. And to the best of my knowledge, never in our history has a presidential candidate ever appealed to a hostile foreign power for assistance in winning an election -- until now. Clearly, Trump finds "dictatorships" much more to his liking than democracies.
So we have a president more inclined to issuing directives than winning over the hearts and minds of a constituency. And now we have a Senate majority leader humbly and placidly bowing to the wishes of a president who is increasingly exposed as a liar and a fraud and one whose allegiance to our Constitution is seriously suspect...These are strange times indeed.
5
I am encouraged she is disturbed. Just like I am hopeful when thoughts and prayers are sent out. Yet the actual votes never materialize. I’ve stopped relying on Republican photo opps and heartfelt speeches to give me any belief that a true moral conviction which can stand up to injustice and lawlessness exists. Like Obama said don’t boo, vote. Well Republicans, stop talking the talk, and booing, go vote!
2
The NYTimes knows the Senator’s stirred conscience will soon fall back into its Alaskan winter hibernation. Why the pretense? Does it really think such a ploy from a newspaper will open the floodgates of conscience and get the GOP to act? Is the editorial staff pandering to the hopes of its readership? I don’t get it.
1
"A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate"????
Sorry, I think that was just someone passing gas.
4
Murkowski is the only elected republican today with any moral conscience.
“A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate”. As a tweet it is somewhat humorous.
1
I am glad that Lisa Murkowski is a vertebrate with intestines. I wish other Republicans evolve those structures.
1
Given that McConnell has already announced that he doesn't intend to be impartial surely there are legal grounds for having him dismissed as a juror.
4
I am really tired of the media especially TV even this morning pushing the narrative that Murkowski might be about to do something honorable. We are just enabling her in re-election by giving her cover. McConnell needs to keep control of the Senate and he is willing for a few supposedly moderates just say some things that will help them stay in power as long as they adhere to the bottom line The media is terribly disappointing in this.
1
Talk about grabbing at straws. The dam is about to break because Murkowski has a problem with the way McConnell is handling this? In the Kavanaugh hearing Senator Collins was going to buck her side and vote with her conscious? Robert Mueller The Republican was going to be our savior who was going rescue us from Trump.Am I missing something here? In a perfect world and if four Republican Senators agree to call witnesses that is going to be the straw that sinks Trump? The four Republican witnesses that the Dems want are not guaranteed to spill the beans on Trump. John Bolton is going to want to go down in history as the Republican who sank Trump? When are we Dems going to let go of this bone and impeach Trump at the ballot box in 2020. Praying for Republicans to grow a conscious to save us from Trump is a fools errand.The Republicans can't stop drinking The Kool Aid at this late hour.
1473
@Steven McCain The dam is not about to break because of Murkowski's problem with McConnell. But Murkowski is the first crack in the rift that will surface between Trump and the Republicans.
In the heat of the moment Republicans would have played partisan politics but now with Nancy babysitting the articles, and with Republicans probably at home in Christmas and thinking individually of themselves first, there is going to be total shift from considering Democrats as the enemy to focusing on why they are supporting Trump and how that will ever help the Party or themselves.
Expect the majority of Republicans to vote for impeachment against Trump.
43
@Steven McCain Almost 100% agree but regardless the fact of Republicans shielding POTUS from the realities of his actions "we" still do need a complete fact finding process (for the sake of our legal constitutional system) and show the facts as close as to these realities so "We The People", not the senate, can make our own decision at the ballots next Nov. Therefore, we need to hear from these "key" witnesses publicly or live with the dire consequences of not facing these realities.
111
@Steven McCain Exactly Trump even though I voted for Trump I consider his policies like demanding Denmark sell Greenland to the US as evil and dangerous this Ukraine justification for impeachment is pure nonsense. Consider Bush Jr was never impeached for the horrific Iraq war which even he himself admitted was based 'wrong' intelligence. I was never going to vote for Trump again but this partisan impeachment effort is wrong.
5
At this point, I have moved to 60% chance of there being a real trial, with the presentation of witnesses. I still sense that when push comes to shove, integrity will prevail in the Senate. Declaring his intent was incredibly stupid of McConnell, but fortunate for the Rule of Law. He's as lawless as Trump.
I think the deciding factor will be the role C. Justice Roberts will take. I just knew he was going to take up the slack when Kennedy bailed. Not a fan of his intially, but I do respect his integrity. This is going to be his opus to history . . . presiding over the Impeachment of Donald J. Trump . . . Personally, I like "U. S. v. Donald John Trump" better . . . :)
282
@revfred2000
Really, you like Roberts' integrity? Which is what? His outreach to the press that "there's no obama judges or..." Not much to go on.
Roberts will make himself invisible during this "trial" -- he doesn't have any real power over this event, and this notion that he "cares" about the SCOTUS reputation as a truly neutral entity is a joke -- he does not.
Roberts cares about the perception of a neutral entity, that's it. In reality, he's become a Trump devotee and a McConnell man through and through. Look at his votes and what he allows into the SCOTOS. Do not be fooled.
69
Good luck with that. Unlike judges in a normal court proceeding, Roberts has little or no power here. Whereas In watergate days, judges seeing that justice Dept lawyers wanted to lose cases against administration defendants, took over the questioning of witnesses to ensure a fair trial; that won’t happen here. Roberts has no power other than as a token representative of the third branch of government who, by his presence, sanctions the proceedings. My bet is he will not be Democracy’s savior. His former mentor chief justice Rehnquist sat there and did nothing in the Clinton impeachment proceedings. Expect nothing less this time round from Mr Roberts.
35
@Raz So you are OK with a US president using the full faith and force of the US to further his own personal political power?
That whole "public servant" thing is just a paperweight?
35
Of course Senate Republicans should follow Sen. Murkowski's lead. But this Editorial Board knows that they will not. This Board knows that the Senate "trial" will be a pro forma affair completely absolving Trump, while ignoring the clear evidence of his crimes.
But this Board makes the same mistake as many others in touting Senate Republicans' loyalty to Trump as the reason they'll acquit him. Many Republican Senators have no such loyalty - but they need the votes of every single Trump supporter.
What is missing from the discussion is the role of Trump voters in all this. Of course the Republican Senate toadies to Trump. But had Trump voters' support dropped substantially by now, Senate Republicans would be crawling all over themselves to remove him.
Some three years on in the most disastrous presidency of my lifetime (and I remember presidents back to Eisenhower), his voters are still in lockstep with him for only one reason - he is a white nationalist. The articles of impeachment drafted by the House of Representatives create a damning record of the morals, beliefs and values of Trump voters, who are some 40% of the American people. That is, they know of Trump's criminal conduct, but they just don't care. They simply want a "president" who tells them that as whites, they are the only "real" Americans. The only thing Trump voters want from their "president" is that he hates brown skinned people as much as they do. And this is the only reason he will remain in office.
2700
@Charles Dodgson
I think white nationalism plays a very prominent role in Trump's enduring support, but let's not forget his willingness to appoint pro-life judges. The evangelicals in his base will overlook absolutely anything for that.
495
@Charles Dodgson I agree with you that Republican senators are afraid of Trump supporters, not loyal to him. Highly likely, they even dislike him and know well how unfit he is for the oval office. Their major concern is a primary challenger.
If they are stick to Trump, they may win a primary. But, how about general elections? Depending on states, the more strongly they support Trump, the less likely they can appeal to non-Trump supporters, such as moderate Republicans and independents, leading to a loss in general elections. What a waste of time and money! That's why many Republican representatives have decided to retire. If Trump were not the current president, many of these Republicans would have run for another term. They wish they could have.
138
@Charles Dodgson It isn't beyond the realm of possibility that Trump won't run for re-election, and that he will be removed from office so he can continue bilking taxpayers paying for his trips to his golf courses in Florida, New Jersey and Virginia. Anything will be possible in the Roaring Twenty-Twenties"!
56
Let's face the facts Mr. President. Women with brains have no use for you.
260
Don't count on Susan Collins. She shed her moderate credentials years ago. She's Mitch's gal now.
226
ALL the Male GOP Senators are abject Cowards. Step up, Women, it’s Time.
234
The NYTimes continues to pretend the Republican party isn't getting exactly what it's been working towards for since the latter 1970s. My it must be nice to live with the blinders of "neutrality" placed over one's eyes, ears, and mouths.
103
Haven't you guys figured out yet that it ain't gonna happen?
67
Romney? Hurd? Kitzinger? Collins? Gardner? Alexander? Mattis? Santorum? Mueller? Wray? Hello? How does it feel to be shown to be craven cowards by Lisa Murkowski? Is what you have to lose by standing up against a fascist cult leader significant compared to what America loses if Trump's crime wave is enabled? Jeff Flake said it: "You can get another job, but you can't get another soul."
225
lets not get our hopes up
39
It’s a laughing matter. She says this and even gets her own NYT editorial. What press! What a maybe-moral compass! oh what hope!!
Oh hello. She’s just lucky she’s not Van Drew, doesn’t have to switch parties to ultimately serve a trump. Really. What a waste of press, NYT.
48
This should say all you need to know about the integrity of Mitch McConnell. Here’s how he is trying to get re-elected.
“Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) strong-armed $914.2 million in federal spending and tax breaks for Kentucky into the recently passed omnibus spending bill — and is making sure Kentuckians know about it.”
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/mcconnell-spending-perks-kentucky-billion
69
Senator Schumer in 1999 said on Larry King Live that the Senate Impeachment trial was NOT LIKE A JURY TRIAL, and he would NOT be an IMPARTIAL JUROR.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/12/27/politics/chuck-schumer-impeachment-1999-kfile/index.html
Where were you when Schumer said so and why did you not write an editorial excoriating him?
If anything, our FREE PRESS should be free and impartial.
Alas, it is not.
40
Oh please, here we go again. Murkowski hedges and keeps everyone in suspense while she gets some headlines. Next, Susan Collins does the same trick a couple weeks later. After that, yadda, yadda, yadda .....
105
Treason's Greetings!
72
Donald J. Trump knows he’s guilty. It’s called: “Conscious of guilt”. Once a con, always a con. Ask any New Yorker.....
101
@Woosa
Conscience of guilt *
Murkowski is “disturbed” that the process is “confused.”
What a nothingburger.
The jury has been bought. The fix has long been in.
55
A senator who shows a sane conscience makes NYT's headline. How insane is this?
51
Just one question for the New Year.
Why do people make the same mistake over and over again and support fascist leaders?
Never mind, not certain I really do want to know.
Janice
35
It's amazing what NYT considers "unafraid to buck her party and her president"
Really, saying she was "disturbed" qualifies?
Wow, ya, Murkowski is really stepping out there putting herself on the line... the repercussions could be... what? She's not up for re-election... I guess it could mean a possible childish and harsh tweet from Potus, and or some shaming from Hannity, Kellyanne Conway, or McConnell? Like getting stung by a bee -- you don't like it, but it happens to everyone at some point. Hardly worthy of commendation from NYT editorial.
How pathetic is it that Murkowski is the model of BOLD GOP INTEGRITY now days!?
Let me know when one of the non-retiring GOP, rep or senator, shows some integrity in ACTION -- a VOTE, or something else of substance.
58
GOP needs to hurry up before another shoe drops. lol Like you thought if this scandal passes things will smooth out. Did ya hear the joke about the criminal that got to sit in the jury box during his trail. Bad part was the jury has already told the judge that "No matter what" he won't be convicted. Al Capone would be so proud.
23
Gee, I guess this means the NYT expects a Democrat to think independently and vote to acquit, huh.
You know, if House Democrats actually get the courage to send the impeachment articles to the Senate.
25
Murkowski is a RINO, more Democrat than Republican.
She needs to be primaried.
8
Ah, please note Schumer’s comments about impartiality- I mean partiality, during the Clinton impeachment. Guess it all depends on which party is the accuser. Politicians !
15
The Times must be into satire now. Who wrote this ludicrous fantasy?
"Stirring?" LM has pretended to be "moderate" (like Collins) for a long time. When she does vote against her party, it's always with full awareness the legislation would pass regardless.
Please stop praising LM for the obvious: a trial requires witnesses. Why don't you praise the sun for rising too, while you're at it?
38
Nah, no stirring of conscience here. McConnell gave Murkowski the go-ahead to gain some wiggle room with her constituents. He knows his vote count even if Murkowski should defect -- if she actually does.
29
Seizing upon Murkowski’s words to suggest they show the first cracks in trump’s praetorian guard, is yet just another element of the false hope media has sold on to its consumers, at least those who dearly want trump gone. By now, we must know that republican words have no value, and bear no indication as to what will actually happen in the days/months ahead. The past unequivocally demonstrates the GOP and its base have become host to a parasitical grifter. Trump is no more a christian than he is a conservative, no more a statesman than a deal maker. He is an opportunist who used his low-rent tabloid and television pedigree to con America, and Republican lawmakers know it.
The acquisition and maintenance of power are fundamental motivators, but should not transcend the reputation, integrity and security of any sovereign state, let alone America’s, whose example to the world is in rapid decline.
When a Republican Senator actually shows duty, and a little backbone, and breaks with Trump, now that will be hopeful news, and worth reporting. But until then, words mean nothing.
44
In retrospect, it is fear of McConnell’s lash and not Trump’s that drives the partisanship which was growing more apparent even before the election. Trump isn’t smart enough to work with others. I am sure that McConnell browbeats and ostracizes anyone that bucks the party. While we are all watching Trump, McConnell’s agenda is the culprit. Trump is nothing without McConnell. With years in the the Senate he is the political tactician. Trump is a bozo. It’s not the Presidential election that matters in 2020, it is the senate.
38
"Mr. Trump is correct that impeachment has exposed congressional hypocrisy. He’s simply confused as to its wellspring."
This fight is far more than the president's impeachable behavior. it's a battle for separation of powers and the basic tenets of the Constitution itself.
So far, the GOP is ensuring that there will be no separation of powers, that the Executive will be neatly entwined with the Senate, and the House left hanging, insulted and attacked at every turn.
I find it absurd that people should grasp a straw of hope in Murkowski's interview. As Republicans have shown, "concern" over presidential wrongdoing or McConnell's role in carrying out a GOP coup of sorts never translates into real action.
If Mukowski were serious, she should lobby her fellow senators to realize the extreme danger this impeachment mess is raising, that the president isn't only consuming his party, he's corrupting the pillars on which this nation was founded.
41
An excellent editorial which clearly explains the unbelievable hypocrisy and partisanship of the Trump Republican Party.
Those looking for a conviction here need to stop - it will not happen. Why go on with it then?
1.) Withholding the impeachment articles are clearly driving Trump over the edge. With each day his childish tantrums get more ridiculous. I say continue it for at least a few more weeks. I'd like to see some Democrats calmly explain that if he simply releases the witnesses and the documentation, we can begin the trial. Put the pressure on him to put the pressure on McConnell.
2.) Several vulnerable Republicans are now trapped and will have to seriously damage themselves in either their primary or their general. Stretching this out only increases the spotlight on Collins, Gardner, McSally and perhaps a few others.
3.) There is a chance Murkowski and 3 others will force an actual trial in the Senate. If so, a full airing of the very strong case against Trump will help to sway the real jurors in this trial - the American voters.
23
Oh my, expressions of concern. Sen. Collins often expresses concerns also, only to follow the party line.
Democratic senator Blumenthal tells us that his republican colleagues are disgusted by trump. Wanna bet they also follow the party line.
Spineless. Corrupt. Cowards.
40
I'll eat my hat if Collins, Murkowski or Portman, Gardner, McSally or Alexander vote against McTrump. What these Senators will do is express concern that witnesses will not be called to testify. But in the end, their reservations will be overcome due to naked political threats by McTrump to make their Senate lives untenable.
It's GOP hardball time. No give allowed, no conscience mollified. Vote with McTrump or else. That's today's Republican Party: cowed and intimidated.
40
Eager as I am to see the so-called president removed from office, Murkowski is a straw I will not grab.
16
Trump’s only tactic is to defeat in detail, to kill off opponents one by one. But he can’t do that in a Senate trial because they all vote together. Trump is in serious trouble because if 20 GOP senators decide to keep their powder dry until the vote, he’s done and he has no recourse. Murkowski is premature but directionally, she is broadcasting Trump’s defeat.
4
The key conscience will be Chief Justice John Roberts'.
14
I refuse to be totally pessimistic about conviction of Trump by the Senate. Murkowski's expression of doubt - heck, any Republican's expression of it - is a first crack in the dam. Will it be enough to start a flood of deflections from the Republican hardline? And will Sen. Murkowski follow through or wimp out at the last minute like Flake did on Kavanaugh? I don't know if there are enough reasonable Republicans remaining to vote to convict; I hope there are for any reason - if not to save their jobs, at least to salvage their reputations before they are handed their walking papers in November.
4
I am unable to comprehend why so many republican representatives and senators support this clearly deficient president. Has gerrymandering worked so well that they must do his bidding to be re elected ? Is there an irresistable stream of lobbyist lucre from which to sip? My own father, a republican , would have seen this improper president as uncouth, amoral and un-patriotic. When Nixon was forced into resignation, my father was stunned. If he were alive today, he would favor the current Oval Office occupant's removal.
16
The GOP has morphed over they years into what’s effectively the PR and marketing department for the billionaire class that get them elected. The idea that the Republicans possess “values” in any way is quaint. They’re protecting Trump because he’s their carnival barkers that brings enough of their supporters into the big top to keep the party in power in our electoral college/gerrymandered reality. Additionally, speaking out against Trump may prove career suicide in their red states even if they do posses values. That’s nice that Murkowski has a conscience. But the GOP death cult doesn’t care if they bury the world for personal profit, and should any pang of conscience arise, they can self hypnotize by repeating to themselves neoliberal theology until they almost believe it.
25
She’s just angling for her own quid pro quo. The Trump Party demands absolute loyalty. If she steps too far out of line she’ll be destroyed and she knows it.
10
“They treated us very unfairly, and now they want fairness in the Senate.”
Translation: "I admit that the Senate trial will be the epitome of unfairness."
“Why should Crazy Nancy Pelosi, just because she has a slight majority in the House, be allowed to Impeach the President of the United States?”
Translation: "I must be an ignoramus because I still don't understand how the three branches of government work after being President for three years."
“He’s very smart guy, a very good guy, a very fair guy,”
Translation: "Mitch will make sure I am not convicted and that's all that counts with me."
30
Later for impeachment. Right now the crisis is electronic voting machines. We must have a nationwide movement to prevent their use in 2020. Hand marked and hand counted paper ballots is the only way to guarantee a fair election. Then deal with Trump and his treasonous cronies.
24
In a nutshell...men are weak and have cowered at the bully since their kindergarten days. They’ve allowed their primal instincts to drive their responses because they lack emotional maturity. Good grief, will they EVER grow up!
14
She has my vote!
3
The thought that anyone believes Murkowski might be the ffirst crack in a Republican wall, makes me laugh out loud.
More likely is that she drew the short candy cane at the GOP Christmas party. She had to become the token "conscience" of the party to dangle as a carrot at the end of some stick that will eventually be used to brutally whip non-conforming members.
PUHLEEEZE! She will crumble and fall in line like they all, always do.
21
The most important questions being asked are if the charges in the Articles of Impeachment true or not. Nothing else matters because without an honest answer we will have failed all those that went before us, and failed all those that come after us. We will have failed all those who fought and died for us, we have failed their families and friends, and we will have failed those who suffer physical and mental pains in their duty to our country. Personal integrity must be the driving force and light we have to follow at this moment in our history. This is unlike any other trial in our history – it is a time of accountability and who each of us truly is. It is as important as any event that has happened since the founding of our country. It is the time that tests our integrity… 4/4
7
"A Stirring of Conscience"? Hardly. How can one stir something that doesn't exist? "Will someone throw Lisa some more arctic oil leases and put her back in her dang place?" - Mitch
14
Doctors will tell you, one can detect electrochemical activity in a human brain, even after the patient is brain dead.
9
The Republicans are ostriches with their head in the sand. Every time someone in their party dares stray off the path and speak up their mind, even lightly, it only lasts a few days until that person is put back on the right path. What Senator Murkowski said will evaporate next week. Has anyone noticed that every time this inept, corrupt and illegitimate president sees a danger coming his way, he tweets, rants, disrupts and springs back on his feet because his Republican sycophants and enablers let him do what he wants even if it means destroying the country. The Republicans are not going to help with the impeachment process, their daily hypocrisy shows how the system works for them and not the people. We are being reminded every day that voting matters more than ever in 2020. Here in Maine, we are ready to say bye bye to Susan, not just the Orange Toad.
22
This president has made the McConnels very rich. He and his wife have a lot to lose with their China deals when this president is gone.
29
Wouldn't the seemingly endless funds of people like Tom Steyer and Michael Bloomberg be put to a more impactful use to fund those opposing people like Mitch McConnell, Susan Collins, Corey Gardner, etc? Pay the legal fees for all those that were forced to sign trump NDA's so they could potentially speak freely about what they know? Oh yeah, I forgot....ego....
17
Oh please! How many times does a Republican murmur some concern about the President and then vote in lockstep with him?
22
This is just for show.
Wait until the open voting comes — Republicans will never dare risk all the “donations” that Putin is pouring in via the NRA.
8
Don't get you hopes up.
7
Fiona Hill, Pamela Karlan, and now LIsa Murkowsky (a little). Do i see a pattern here?
Murkowski is just another Susan Collins...all moderate talk, all extremist Republican action...
13
Senators should ask themselves, “what would John McCain do?”
11
Oh that Lisa Murkowski can clutch her pearls along with Susan Collins of Maine but when all is said and done, they capitulate.
Spare me the platitudes. The only way forward is to vote these worthless Republicans out of office.
28
She’s nothing but a hand-wringer. She feigns concern about his deep moral, intellectual and diplomatic failings, but ultimately supports him. Susan Collins, too. Why does the Editorial Board pretend otherwise? She’s no role model or bellwether.
14
"A stirring of conscience"
You wish.
I'll believe when I see it.
Not a creature was stirring not even a mouse.
18
More shadow play, she drew the short straw to fill in for Susan Collins' usual gag of throwing a tattered bit of conscience for appearances, and then she votes the party line anyway. But first, they'll have special briefings to give the appearance of due diligence, but the result is always the same. They're a cult of money and power, beholden only to their donors' interests. Trump and Fox News keeps 'The Base' happy with bread and circus and insulting their 'enemies', the dreaded Democrats, worse than Russians. What a crock. Even if we elect Joe Biden, does anyone think this is going to change for the better?
9
I give her two weeks before she is on FOX News talking about how Ukraine interfered in our election, not Putin.
10
only the editorial board of the "paper of record" could be dumb enough to believe senator murkowski. fool me once, however...
8
Nonsense. She's as phony as a three dollar bill. She's destroying the Alaskan environment too.
14
We need to flood the streets of Washington to give the Republicans a taste of Hong Kong.
16
Trump can do what he wants, the Democrats are not allowed to do the same. Dictators remain dictators till they die.
7
It was a woman who dared...
5
A jury of granny women would set our President on a life-changing course. It may happen.Most of Senators have wives.
5
If Mc Connell and DJT tell the Republican Senate to go jump off Half Dome to certain death, there would be a long line all the way from Fresno waiting to take their turn. My only hope is that each and every one of them will hold their noses while they perform this rite.
7
Can you say “fig leaf”?
3
The NYTs Editors write a very confused, poorly thought out endorsement of Lisa Murkowski.
The lady is the product of a Political Dynasty from Alaska.
Her most recent election was only successful after a careful manipulation of the voting system. Joe Miller, Yale Grad and War Vet, was pasted in the Press(largely owned and controlled by the Murkowski Family and Friends)...as a NutJob from the Tea Party. If I'm not mistaken, M.r Miller actually WON the Republican Nomination,,,,,and Murkowski refused to allow it.....so she ran as an "independent" and finally beat him in the general election.
Murkowski, far from being a wise statesperson concerned about the future of AMerica......is in reality, little more than a self-serving politicial who has done little to help her constituency,,,,,obsessed with keeping her own Status Quo hands gripping the levers of Power.....a Bush Minion from days gone by..........
8
Is it too late? Too late for what? Is it too late to realize that our country has been sliding down the slippery slopes of Truth, Beauty and Goodness past a point of recovery?
Ancient history says Yes! Every empire from the very beginning of time itself has fallen.
Having said that, the individual can still reign supreme. Each personality has the ability to steer their ship towards supreme ideals, regardless of the outward appearances of falsehood.
In the meantime, as a society, if the majority of the populace truly knows and wants to be lead by Truth, Beauty and Goodness, they can demonstrate that at the voting booth this new year. Do the right thing!
15
The prism through which Europeans view America is so distorted with Trump fibs and distortions that it’s impossible to find out what actually is going on.
Reality has become distorted we may never get reality back in our lives.
5
You forget her and Collins both automatically gain a massive amount of credit everytime they are concerned about what their party is doing right before the vote with them anyways.
29
The Times's Editorial Board would do well to stop their hand-wringing about Republicans and begin assessing whether a Centrist or Progressive stance has a more likely chance of gaining the favor of Obama-Turned-Trump voters. The DNC made a fatal error in strategy in 2016 - will they learn from that next year? Has the landscape changed? What's the formula? This is where I'd like to see your considerable perspective.
17
A "stirring conscience" is of little use or worthiness if it does not guide stirring actions for a conscientious response. In that context, the subject of this article rates a "meh." She's only a little more newsworthy for the impeachment trial than the rest of the people on her side of the aisle.
16
Stick to the issue of whether he did or he didn't and quit the party slandering favored by the President and select others that like to play that game instead of doing the job for which they were elected.
6
Too bad the House didn’t have a conscience. They started with a goal and achieved it without regard to due process. I agree, the senate should do better than that.
7
A senator for all seasons - I say.
Good luck looking for sentiments of utmost principles in this senator or for that matter any Senator.
The 9nky thing stirring is what's in it in this pot 9f trading favours?
Of course, she has problems with our party.
She was once opposed by the Alaskan Republican establishment - only to get elected.
Folks lauding her below may want to remember her ANWR vote, or for that matter - recent spending bill that included a protection for Alaskan salmon, not to mention Defense handouts.
Plus - she is not running in 2020. And she needs no money as a result.
She is a politician and will use her votes to wring as much advantage as she can.
So, I take it as an opening bid - nothing more, nothing less.
Folks may want to remember that mightily as she tried - Justice Kavanaugh was still confirmed.
And if it were not for now dead Sen McCain - Obamacare would be history. Her vote was irrelevant.
Sen Collins is running for a reelection and her calculation is a lot different from this Alaska senator.
So, she can have all the open mind she wants - fact still remains - there is nothing there there for a conviction in the Senate.
And the Majority Leader holds all cards on crafting a process on a trial.
And she may be reminded that Clinton trial had no witnesses.
8
@Neil So what?
2
I keep waiting for you to point out that Mitch McConnell has a conflict of interest. He gets financial benefits from his wife Elaine Chao's being Secretary of Transportation. It may seem like a minor thing but she is actually taking actions that benefit her family's business in China and McConnell's constituents in Kentucky, based on your own reporting. Plus she gets salary and retirement benefits. I know that is not the sole reason for McConnell's refusal to hold an impartial trial. He has proven time and time again that he will subvert rules and norms to achieve his own ends. Who are his donors, anyway? He really has never displayed an ounce of statesmanship. Good for Murkowski to show some spine and integrity.
23
What a sad moment in our history and reverence for Constitutional law that ONLY ONE member of the Republican leadership in our country has the courage to publicly question the grip that Trumpism has on our nation's governance.
32
". . . she does not want to be viewed as a rubber stamp for a preordained acquittal. She takes her public duty more seriously than party loyalty, and she can be pushed too far."
Oh brother, give me a break already.
Murkowski can posture all she wants for the cameras and the media for her words means nothing when her actions do not follow suit and are empty and hollow in the end.
38
"If only more of her colleagues felt the same."
Cripes, it's not about feelings! The facts are clear, through a preponderance of evidence.
24
One lone Republican Senator supposedly has a "Stirring of Conscience". She's "disturbed" that Mitch McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, is engaging in jury tampering with Donald Trump by working with Trump to find a way to circumvent the Constitution and acquit Trump as quickly as possible.
Lisa Murkowski couldn't even be bothered to mention that in an impeachment trial every Senator must take a special oath to render judgments impartially and on the merits alone. McConnell already publicly stated he intends to violate that oath, meaning he intends to commit perjury.
This means any verdict rendered by the Senate will be invalid. In any other proceeding, whether state or federal, civil or criminal, Trump and McConnell would be criminally prosecuted. Why hasn't this editorial stated all of these facts instead of wrongly praising Murkowski?
Murkowski's lip service proves there's that no conscience, or regard for the Constitution or the rule of law, remaining in the GOP. The press is so desperate to pretend good Republicans still remain in power that it holds Murkowski forward as somehow deeply principled.
Saying you're disturbed by the Senate Majority Leader committing jury tampering and perjury, and failing to say you'll stand against it and for our Constitution, means you don't care about our republic. Trump, McConnell, and the GOP are not simply violating the US Constitution, they're flaunting it. Murkowski telling Americans she's a bit disturbed is insulting.
48
"Ms. Murkowski’s expression of concern sets her apart." This is not sending a message to her constituents and McConnell. One shouldn't confuse Murkowski's weak expression with action or a statement of intent. This false signalling is typical of her. She will stay within her party lines, regardless of the crazy direction it takes.
17
Good for Senator Murkowski! She has bucked her party’s line before and has the potential to do it again. Even if she ultimately fails to convict Trump, she is doing the nation a favor by calling into question McConnell’s knee jerk protection of the president, which is itself no less wrong than anything Trump does.
4
Are sanctions worth angering the Chinese? Only if they can help the Uighurs, which they cannot. By contrast, tariffs can cause the Chinese to trade by the rules even if they are counterproductive in the short run. Democrats favor a meaningless show of moral outrage and oppose a trade war that might prove helpful. My party is well-meaning but dumb.
2
Don't be fooled by Lucy promising to not pull away the football at the last second.
This is just pathetic posturing to claim some shred of legitimacy. She's totally under "trump's" control.
14
It seems clear to me that McConnell made a stupid remark. Sometimes smart men (and women) say stupid things. That said I do not think what Trump did comes close to warrant negating an election. This will come back to haunt democrats just like their use of the nuclear option to confirm Appeals Court judges led to the use of the nuclear option by Republicans to confirm two Supreme Court nominees. Politicians of both parties think only of themselves and the next election. Are they really so different from the rest of us?
3
@alan brown - How is it negating an election? Pence would take over and the Republicans would still have the Oval Office.
7
People complain that billionaires try and buy elections. But billionaires can’t be bought.
Let’s face it; it’s all about money. Murkowski and Collins, if they are afraid, are because they fear the wrath of Trump in the form of no financial help or a primary challenge. But if they were billionaires they would not fear losing their job in the Senate.
Surely it’s not party unity because Trump has hijacked the Republican Party. It’s his party now. Not in the way that it’s always the president’s party. This is different.
Many many Republicans, like Republicans For The Rule Of Law, feel he has taken over their party and have demanded witness like Mulvaney and Giuliani testify. But the Republicans in the US Senate are afraid to lose their jobs. Bottom line.
10
If Murkowski really supports a fair trial in the Senate she would have spoken out against trump long ago. She is not going to confront McConnell or any senator. This is a short lived gimmic on her part and McConnell will handle it as such. Sadly!
14
Good editorial but misses the central point. Go back and listen to Sen. Murkowski's statements before the Kavanaugh vote. They were weakly reasoned and even more weakly delivered. Now listen to her vote on Kavanaugh. She mumbled so hesitantly you could barely hear her. Clearly she was scared and trying to tell her colleagues that yes, she was pregnant but just a little bit pregnant -- like the Congressional hawks who say they want to use nuclear weapons, but only small nuclear weapons.
In contrast, go back and listen to the speeches by Sens Morse, Gruening, and McGovern against the disastrous Vietnam war. They spoke up loud and clear, and will be well remembered by history for it.
Sen. Murkowski would do best to remember the old saw that "If you strike at a king you must kill him." All that said, Murkowski is already a tower of integrity and strength compared to her worm Republican colleagues. Give her credit for that. But she will do best to trumpet rather than whisper.
9
Garbage. This is absolute nonsense, and how horrifying that this is what constitutes a Profile in Courage in the modern GOP. Murkowski is simply making a hand-wave to centrist voters in Alaska, as consequential as a briefly furrowed brow. We've seen this all throughout the Trump presidency. Shameful.
27
Kind of ridiculous that we have to fall over each other to compliment something that should be taken for granted. Doing one's job as a public servant.
18
Do NOT be fooled by this! In the end Lisa Murkowski will do whatever Trump and McConnell tell her to do like she always does. The only republicans who actually stand up to Trump are the ones who are retiring. Just like Rand Paul, Jeff Flake, and Susan Collins, Ms. Murkowski will pretend to have a conscience to gran headlines and then vote against impeachment.
12
The attempted coverup for Donald J. Trump will commence in the Republican majority led United States Senate once Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi releases the two articles of impeachment at her call. We will be watching and vote them all out for their cowardliness. The House than reserves the right to ratified additional Articles of Impeachment as more evidence is uncovered for this most corrupt President in our lifetime. It is of no wonder Donald J. Trump is unraveling and going mad for he finally doesn’t control the narrative and knows he is guilty. Onward!
12
In 30 seconds I figured this one out. If Murkowski is defying Trump, Alaska must not be Trump territory. Looked up the 2016 primaries and indeed Cruz won Alaska. Murkowski can speak out because she's got nothing to lose. The Board is SO gullible.
4
Please. Sen Murkowski makes these noises every so often (just as Sen Collins does). They, Romney, and the rest of these “moderates” are complete and transparent frauds.
17
WOW. a Republican putting Country before Trump!! Will this alter the final vote? No. Will Mitch McConnell even care? No again. Will a few more Republicans follow her lead? Hopefully.
1
"... Stirring of Conscience …"
I see absolutely NO evidence of a 'conscience stirring' in the GOP senate whatsoever.
What I DO see is the umpteenth rerun of a fake "Stirring of Conscience" by one of the tiny cast of characters who do this over and over again, then vote the party line. I'm not fooled. I'm not amused. I'm actually rather annoyed at the stupidity who is a sucker for this. This does NOT work on me. It reminds of the Twilight Zone episode where a man is condemned to spend eternity in a room with an insurance salesman.
7
I suspect more of them feel the same but are afraid to buck Trump.
4
Maybe this is just how Lisa and Susan get stuff for their state. Float a balloon - no full comital - she is "disturbed".
That should be just enough to have Mitch's people call here people - to see if there might be something that Alaska needs support for.
Meanwhile - track record says she will fold.
Everyone knows the trick is; don't acknowledge what you see.
We've all read the book.
Those are the rules of the emperors new clothes.
4
trump is using Barr's "Russian conspiracy" Exoneration as cover to execute crimes while claiming that Democrats are just poor losers.
As a result of Barr declining to investigate the original two whistle blowers' complaints, trump is free to continue to spit in the face of the Rule of Law.
Until trump ACTUALLY shoots someone, the GOP will remain complicit - all Murkowski's grandstanding is simply that: grandstanding.
Her integrity is just a badge she flashes every once in a while, like now, then she puts it away and votes Right in line.
7
Very predictable by Murkowski. Probably just looking for a payoff.
6
Is there something smaller than "stirring"? 'Cause that's where Murkowski's conscience is at. According to Michael Moore, who's been more accurate than most, the only hope we have of removing Trump lies on that server where they moved the Ukraine material and where it may safely be assumed there is much worse to be found. As for Susan Collins, she'll fool the media twice with a big windup to nothing unless said server material is made public.
2
Thank you, Senator Murkowski, for your independence and patriotism. I sincerely hope you follow through with actions and not just words of regret, and that you help persuade your fellow senators to take this event seriously, and not simply see it as some kind of partisan political Super Bowl.
Donal Trump is not fit to lead this country. He is crooked. He is dishonest. He has lied to Congress and to the Amercan people countless times and his actions strike at the heart of our democracy, our freedom, and our national safety.
You and your colleagues are one of the last wall of defense for our nation. Please heed the call
4
A journey of a thousand miles begins with one step....perhaps this is the first step. Just perhaps?
3
The Republican silence toward this wannabe tyrant is profoundly abhorrent.
It is gratifying that one Republican has the courage and ethics her colleagues lack.
2
Obama was more of a traditional republican than most of the current GOP Senate!
3
Mr. McConell wants to prevent witnesses in a Senate trial for one reason--any witnesses, including Republicans who worked in the White House--would confirm Trump's wrongdoing. The Republican strategy is when you have no leg to stand on, cut off the legs of your opponents.
6
Ms Murkowski just wants to ensure that it "looks" good. We've been there before with that Supreme Court Justice that abused little girls. Good act, changed nothing.
This will change nothing either, it will just be good show.
She will still vote against impeachment.
5
Leave it to a woman to put a crack in the "old boys club". Let's hope she follows through and actually votes for a true trial. She did vote for the Affordable Care Act; and was a negative on the beer-loving Kavanaugh so there's hope. And may the crack spark
a few more who grow some spine and vote for country over party.
Let' s hope democracy spreads in the Republican Senate - at least it's a glimmer of hope to save adherence to the constitution and the oath these Reps. took to defend and preserve it.
3
Excusing Trump from his attempt at extortion back use he's "done so much for the country" is akin to keeping pedophile priests in the Catholic church, because of the size of their congregation and donation levels. As with sexual abuse, extortion stands alone as a reason to convict someone. There is no need for mitigating factors to be introduced as any level of defense to these crimes.
5
I remember when John McCain voted down the elimination of Obamacare, he said something I haven’t forgotten: “For way to long, we have been playing partisan games instead of doing what is good for America” (not verbatim but you get the jest.)
Apparently some things never change.
9
Poppycock. Murkowski, along with Collins, will vote the GOP line when it counts, as always, her fake consternation at McConnell's moral turpitude notwithstanding.
8
"But in a Republican Party so cowed by this president, with most lawmakers too timid to question even his most grotesque behavior ... "
They are not "too timid" to object to the grotesque behavior of this President. They are all in on it. His behavior and values seem to model and mirror their own. It is a self-reinforcing spiral of disinhibition of their worst selves.
8
Americans know nothing of this. The Uighurs are a separate people living in a single province. Like the Kurds, the Chechnyans, the Bosnian Serbs, and the West Bank Palestinians. As you can see from the examples, things generally play out badly. We are not talking about an ethnic minority. We are talking about a nation within a nation. The Chinese are like the Iraqis, the Russians, the Serbs and the Israelis. All these dilemmas have been impossible to resolve. There may be counter examples. I can't think of any. But it's important to understand that nations within nations repeatedly result in atrocities. And there are few successful models if any.
2
The Editorial Board has described a demented man, whose continued presidency is dependent on McConnell and the GOP not breaking ranks. I would argue however that the wild card is the demented man - as Trump is neither trustworthy, consistent or sane.
5
Write down your title as the biggest overstatement of 2019. Murkowski and Collins won’t do the right thing, and coming to think of it, neither would saint McCain.
These people have sold their soul to the highest bidder a long time ago.
7
"A Stirring of Conscience in the Senate"? There's a little bit of that but going around but don't worry, will pass. Just take two bribes and call me in the morning...
6
I'll believe it when I see the votes. So-called moderates voted on dotted party lines when push came to shove on Kavannah.
6
I think I’ll hang on to the realization that Sen. Murkowski isn’t necessarily right simply because self-professed progressives who can’t seem to spell her name properly are yelling at her for disagreeing with them about anything, and bellowing Trumpists who can’t seem to pay any attention at all to reality are attacking her for being a traitress.
The only sad part is, what she’s saying about the impeachment trial that can’t possibly begin before about January 6th ought to be plain old boilerplate, nothing special.
But as it is, what with a lot of “leftists,” who’ll probably flip Republican sooner than you think, and a lot of Trumpists who’ll be voting for who knows what horror sooner than you think, she looks like a genius.
If you think Murkowski is sincere, or her stance has any chance of changing the Republic Senate stranglehold, I have a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you.
5
Why don't Republicans want witnesses? Afraid of what might come to light? Guilty consciences?
The only ones who fear the truth are those with something to hide. Only answer is to vote these jokers out if you're tired of corruption and lies.
8
"Now, charged with abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, the president is counting on the Senate majority leader, Mitch McConnell, to make it all go away."
"Make it all go away" is the polar opposite of what Brad Mehldau is talking about in his album Finding Gabriel. I recommend you all check out this album and recommend it to Paul Krugman if he doesn't have anything in mind for Friday Night Music.
To be clear, Brad Mehldau is today's jazz pianist. And by "make it all go away," he is refering to Trump and his supporters. Given that Trumps's supporters have guns, Mehldau and his son (in the song at least) have opted to run for the hills.
In any case, you have to listen to Brad Mehldau. Doesn't matter what album. They are all amazing.
1
Having watched the testimony of 17 witnesses, it was saddening to watch the GOP representatives. Their defense strategy was no defense. Taking off your shoes and thumping it on the desk is no defense. But what else can you do when you cannot defend the facts from 17 witnesses? You could clearly see the racial demographic make-up on each side: Democrat and Republican. White party make-up versus white/non-white party. When white support remains unchanged in face of all evidence, Democrats can do nothing that will change their minds. Giving the GOP enough rope to hang themselves may perhaps be the best thing to do.
6
So we have one Republican senator, Lisa Murkowski, who is neither a coward nor an accomplice. This vintage GOP is anything but grand. Old? Yes.
3
@wit @magicisnotreal so right! The Senate should be on trial at this point. Everything is askew if the Law Makers are turning a blind eye to the Law. These people care not about anything. How in the world did they get elected and continue to have support. Is the average person voting for these Republican do nothings that dumb?!! I'm fed up with all of them! We need to flip the Senate along with sending Trump packing down to Florida. ENOUGH damage has been done and these people need to be held accountable!
I'm just fed up, sick and tired of all of them!
Listen we've been letting the "centrists" lead long ENOUGH because we needed to compromise and get everyone on board and what we got was Kavanaugh, all sense of compromise gone, pushing in a record number of judges that weren't up to ABA standards, a crooked inept POTUS and the Grim reaper sitting on laws. Enough go full Progressive in 2020! We've tried everything else!
6
It still astounds me how the Republican party cannot see how badly Trump is losing it. His deranged and constant tweets, total lack of understanding of the impeachment process, nor any understanding of the co-equal branches of government.
Calling people names, like a little kid. Love letters with North Korea. This behavior is clearly pre-dementia, worse than his branded behavior in his younger days.
Much as I hate to say it, I would take Pence and his adoring gazes over this incompetent lunatic who holds the nuclear codes.
8
Unfortunately the only ones you’ll hear this from are senators from purple hued states; or those that have had grudges with Trump in the past (ie Romney)
The rest are too scared to buck the party trend, history be dammed.
The only way this could change is if some new information was revealed, something more damming.
Trump outing the whistleblower yesterday doesn’t seem to matter much anymore to his base, but the public should see this as cowardly and typical of a tyrant.
If he gets to out the whistleblower, then we should get to hear the witnesses!
3
When he lies and the media reports it, that is not bias. Bias is exemplified by Fox by NOT reporting it when he lies. That is the very definition of bias.
The latest lie that Trump insults Americans with:
“no Due Process, proper representation or witnesses,” charged the president, falsely. “Now Pelosi is demanding everything the Republicans weren’t allowed to have in the House. Dems want to run majority Republican Senate. Hypocrites!”
His acolytes just allow this nonsense.
The media reports that Trump stole from a charity. Who's fault would that be? The media for reporting it or Trump for doing it?
The absurdity is boundless; Now McConnell joins in by saying he is colluding with the WH and admits to not attempting impartiality. Then he will take an oath swearing to be impartial after announcing he will not be. How much absurdity will they get away with? Hypocrites!
9
GOP's final day of reckoning has certainly arrived. After stuffing their stomachs with xmas turkey over the holidays, hopefully they will realize that they are standing on the edge of the precipe. Jump into it or turn back.
4
I’m 55 and have learned a lot in my life time. Never trust a Republican
13
Who in their right mind wants even another fifteen minutes with this luggard at the helm. Please, for the sake of America, take this chance and dump him.
After all these decades of the "God Bless America" rhetoric, I'm just hoping we can scratch-out a small miracle. I would settle for that.
7
One person thinking...may be more than our Senate has, but it is not nearly enough to overcome the Fox propaganda machine.
2
McConnell's coordination with Trump...obstruction of justice?
5
This one of the best paragraphs I have seen about this situation. I too remember Eisenhower. And race riots. I'm white growing up in a city which had a race riot in 1917. I never thought about being white, it was not not something to have but it just was. Then there were the "others" who may have well been from Mars. Not "us".
Odd that most aid recipients are white
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2017/02/16/the-biggest-beneficiaries-of-the-government-safety-net-working-class-whites/
Some three years on in the most disastrous presidency of my lifetime (and I remember presidents back to Eisenhower), his voters are still in lockstep with him for only one reason - he is a white nationalist. The articles of impeachment drafted by the House of Representatives create a damning record of the morals, beliefs and values of Trump voters, who are some 40% of the American people. That is, they know of Trump's criminal conduct, but they just don't care. They simply want a "president" who tells them that as whites, they are the only "real" Americans. The only thing Trump voters want from their "president" is that he hates brown skinned people as much as they do. And this is the only reason he will remain in office.
10
Murkowski is openly deceiving people. She has no real concern. She will vote the party line just like she did with Kavanaugh’s confirmation after doing her little dog and pony show there. Disgusting that she should receive any praise for her comments.
6
The media may be making to large a stink over Murkowski's seeming thinking out loud ruminating out her tendency toward sudden Constitutionality! I'll leave it to Hamlet to put it to words! :
HAMLET
“Seems,” madam? Nay, it is. I know not “seems.”
'Tis not alone my inky cloak, good mother,
Nor customary suits of solemn black,
Nor windy suspiration of forced breath,
No, nor the fruitful river in the eye,
Nor the dejected 'havior of the visage,
Together with all forms, moods, shapes of grief,
That can denote me truly. These indeed “seem,”
For they are actions that a man might play.
But I have that within which passeth show,
These but the trappings and the suits of woe.
5
Is it possible for Chief Justice Roberts to declare a mistrial if needed?
2
I am disappointed that the Editorial Board fell for this fable. So Lisa Murkowski is "disturbed" but talk is cheap, and part of the Senate game - pretend to do something but do nothing. Senator Murkowski is, as Mr. Dodgson said, in lockstep with
Dear Leader aka McConnell. Please move away, there is nothing to see here.
4
Nothing to see here, only a token effort of smoke and mirrors. Move along now...
5
Conscience stirred, perhaps, but not shaken. They have got, after all, a licence to kill impeachments.
4
She definitely has a soul. Good for you, Lisa. You'll be able to sleep at night, look your family and friends straight in their eyes, and they will honestly know you love them and the United States of America. God help those who continue down the path of Mitch McConnell. They are doomed to live out their lives in disgrace and self loathing.
The hardcore Evangelicals play a major role in all this.
If Trump tweeted "Burn your Bibles" tonight, there'd be a stampede for matches across the country tomorrow.
No big deal. They obviously haven't read the Good Book in quite a while or this man would have been toast the day after the Access Hollywood tape airing.
All he's done since then is run a black Sharpie across most of the Ten Commandments anyway.
Sick. So sick. And sad.
7
Where was the Republicans’ concern about “process” with Merrick Garland?!! Murkowski like every other Republican is beyond cynical and hypocritical to her very core. These are evil, unreasonable people.
9
Oh no, is Lisa pretending to be conscientious again? I honestly have more respect for the die-hard Trumper sycophants. At least they don’t pretend to have a conscience just to get on the editorial page. If Murkowski is serious, she will abandon the Republican party.
4
Past performance is a predictor of future behavior, so what a joke to even think she'll stray from the party line. She and Susan Collins will make frowny faces, go tut-tut, and then fall in line with Mitch.
4
Senator Murkowski should leave the Republican Party as should (at least) a dozen others. Go Independent. The GOP left them.
“The line it is drawn
The curse it is cast.......”
2
Lisa gets some pr; she will not vote her conscience- bet on it.
5
More chance of a glacier freezing than a republican showing a conscience.
7
How sad is the state were in when this brief anodyne statement is heralded by The Paper Of Record as an exemplary display of leadership!
5
There is no Republican conscience. How many times does Lucy have to pull away the football before the Charlie Brown media stops falling for it?
4
The title of the editorial seems to offer foolish hope that a tide is turning, but the realities enumerated in the piece shatter all hope. Thinking one senator will cause the dam of Trump support to burst is folly. It will not take one or four senators to switch allegiance and end this nightmare of obstruction and destruction of institutions. It will take 20 or so to remove him and signal to the electorate that it really, really is serious. I fear it will take another major damning revelation, or a lot of witness testimony, or some catastrophic breakdown to sway the senate.
4
Boy, it sure would be great if the Times republished it’s editorial from 1998 admonishing Schumer et al. to keep an open mind and let the evidence of Clinton’s illegal conduct take the Senate where the constitution required - the same conduct for which the same Senate removed a federal judge. I can hardly wait to read it.
2
I wonder what T-MC will use to bend her to their will? The carrot or the stick?
2
Why didn’t Trump do more to get ahead of Russia in the hypersonic weapons rac?
Trump was suckered into believing everything Trump told him.
I think Trump sold us out.
“Yet while the United States military was once thought to be well ahead in hypersonic technology, the pace of development flagged in recent years.”
“China and Russia made hypersonic weapons a national priority. We didn’t,” William B. Roper, the head of Air Force acquisitions and technology, said on Friday. “Every service now has a major hypersonics program in a departmentwide effort to catch up.”
3
Well, when the sentiment rises to the Sen. Susan Collins level of 'concern', then you know you have a GOP uprising in the Senate.
1
Let us just pretend. Remember Cavanaugh?
4
I want to know what Martha McSally is thinking. Former USAF Officer, she knows what the oath means. Let’s have the NYT do a similar piece on her. So far, she’s invisible on this.
3
Pretending that you are the righteous and the Republicans are the only sinners, fools the sheep for only so long before they realize it’s all politics. The best chance the left has to get something better than an outright defeat is to never submit the articles to the senate and cry foul. But don’t cry for too long because you can’t cry wolf forever because the sheep aren’t as dumb as you think.
1
Déjà vu. Very likely nothing to see (of substance) here.
Liberals are weary and wary of the 2 Senate teases, Murkowski and Collins. Just more Republican kabuki vaudeville.
They are Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown to kick; that she promises to allow him to kick, but inevitably pulls away at the last second causing Charlie Brown to slip and fall.
Wah! Wah! Waaahhh!
Send out all your subpoenas. Maybe bargain for witnesses; putting Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, Nancy Pelosi, and Adam Schiff up for witness trade. Do strategic planning and rehearsals. Add time limits and detailed procedures for Constitutional processes like Impeachment, so that they get timely decisions by the Supreme Court and the People know what to expect. That could be another Due Process Amendment. “Justice delayed is Justice denied.” Be ready to prosecute Trump as soon as he is out of office.
Accept that no Republican Senator will ever vote for removal. Work for the Blue Wave next November!
4
This is why Senator Toomey has to be defeated in 2022!
1
A conscientious Republican? Give me a break. Nothing but posturing.
6
You're dreaming of a era long gone by. She's a phony and only doing it for attention/save her job/curry favor, etc. Choose your poison.
5
There are at least two “cracks” in the Republican dam (or chokehold; choose thy metaphor): (1) Sen. Murkowski’s complaint about Sen. McConnell’s lockstep allegiance, who will still vote for DJT to keep her seat in the end; and (2) the debate among conservative Christians - nominally including “political Evangelicals” - initiated recently by the outgoing editor of Christianity Today, Mark Galli. Regarding (2), these “Evangelicals“ - like their radical extremist counterparts in other politically- allied religions - use their religion as a political means to justify their self-serving “right”-eous ends: self preservation, largely based on the two most motivating factors in national politics ... power (read: race) & resources (read: wealth).
1
The first motion put to Justice Roberts should be to exclude McConnell and Graham from the proceedings as they have announced they will not be truthful to the required oath to be impartial. Judges regularly are asked and do this and it would seem as presiding officer it would be his duty. Then it would be up to the entire senate to ratify or reject a ruling to exclude them.
6
Murkowski offers cold comfort when she says she is “disturbed” by Trump’s behavior. One is “disturbed” by distractions, nuisances, and other minor annoyances that upset normal patterns. If Murkowski truly loves this country and honors her oath of office, she should be horrified, not merely disturbed. That, in a nutshell, is the problem and corruption of today’s Republican Party. Until she and other Republican Senators have the courage to band together to speak the truth about Trump and to defend our Constitution and the rule of law, there is no hope other than to try to vote every single Republican out of each and every office.
5
Facts are still important. Regardless of over-analysis of Murkowski's metapolitics and accusations of expeditious political posturing, it needs to be said that for a GOP Senator, demurring - even slightly - to offer anything less than praise for the President all but guarantees a primary challenge and forced retirement. Murkowski has called for serious consideration by the Senate of the Articles of Impeachment in accordance with her Constitutional duties. She has done so at great peril to her own political fortunes. Another famous republican woman also did the same many years ago. Margaret Chase Evan's Declaration of Conscience speech in 1950 called for fact-based examination of the House Un-American Activities Committee led by such infamous luminaries as Joseph McCarthy and Richard Nixon. Opposing McCarthy at that time was a very risky move, one that virtually guaranteed being labeled a Communist at a time of heightened cold war paranoia. While Trump Trump has his McConnells and his Jim Jordans and his Lindsey Grahams, Eugene McCarthy had Richard Nixon and Roy Cohn (yes, the same Roy Cohn who years later served as Donald Trump's lawyerly bulldog). So in the face of near certain political destruction, it is necessary to welcome and to celebrate courageous behavior like that of Smith and Murkowski. It is their actions that inspire others to remember that facts, well-considered, are all that we have to protect and preserve our democracy.
4
I wish that the press would stop repeating the Republicans' "due process" complaints which are totally inapplicable to the House impeachment.
Impeachment is not a criminal trial. The closest parallel to the House's articles of impeachment are indictments handed down by a Grand Jury and the Grand Jury is not bound by "due process" as there is no opportunity for the defense to object to testimony, confront their accusers, cross-examine withesses or present their own witnesses.
The Senate hearings are the closest thing to a criminal trial and this is where due process is appropriate and necessary as is the ability of both sides to call witnesses.
If Trump is so insistent that he be afforded due process, he should be directing his attention to the Senate but, of course, in reality that is the LAST thing that he wants.
7
Murkowski always does this: she complains and then votes with the rest of the Republicans. It is for show. She is the designated distraction..
9
It is so easy to despair. To throw one's hands up and believe that since the Senate is in Trump's corner, nothing and no one can make a difference. A despairing view of our society becomes more even clouded by media influences. This focus not the drama perpetuates an unbalanced view of reality. The general exclusion of good news leaves us with the impression that "no news is good news" it would also appear that "good news is no news." If we look at the world realistically we will see that the powerful influences of both good and evil. The world is not all beautiful. Neither is it all bad.
2
Oh stop already. Murkowski pulls this very same routine on some issue or another about every 6 months, then votes straight GOP. It's simply a show.
17
I respect Lisa Murkowski, truly. But I am waiting to see if
A: What this is, is she wants something, or
B: Trump (or McConnell ) is gonna try and buy her off.
We hope that vulnerable Republicans like Gardner might join Murkowski and insist on the evidence Trump has been withholding be produced. In fact, Trump has just endorsed Collins, a sure indicator that bags full of cash are coming her way.
Who knows what back room deals are being cut for the others? Who knows what Romney has been offered? McConnell is more powerful than Trump and he’s the ultimate horse trader.
Let us not forget that Manchin and Jones are feeling pressure to break for Trump. This jury isn’t primarily interested in evaluating the evidence. If they were, Trump would be out. This jury is about individual senators weighing their ethical obligations against political calculations and trying to figure out a way to stay in office. Truth has nothing to do with it. Trump has dispensed with that. Bob Woodward had it right: Trump’s weapon of choice is Fear.
8
Conscience in the Senate?
Remember when the so called moderate Republicans voted exactly like the most conservative Republicans to repeal and replace the ACA? Remember all the silence regarding Trump's continuing corruption, his trust of Putin over the trust of our own intelligence agencies, that he is a national security risk?
6
When Mitch says he will not be impartial, he knows he is scared. Very scared.
8
We've seen this movie before, with Murkowski and Collins playing the lead roles. First time, shame on them. Second and third time, shame on us. Since when has spinelessness become a badge of courage? These two have once again put themselves, their party and their leader above their country. This too shall pass, yet only after they and their 'esteemed' colleagues will have caused catastrophic damage to our democracy. A true patriot such as John McCain may have left that august body known as the Senate, but his spirit will live on as a reminder of the bravery required to take a stand for what America should and used to stand for.
6
I am hoping that Senator Murkowski's statement in her interview is the beginning of a turning of the tide. It quite a spectacle how Trump has so cowered the Republican Senate to dance to his tune. It does seem that having & wanting to keep power does corrupt the soul. As for Trump I am sure that Roy Cohen is looking up and smiling . He taught Trump how to fight back his way didn't he? Trump will keep up his barrage of lies since in the minds of many they have become truth. I am keeping my fingers crossed that in addition to Murkowski some of the other Republican Senators such as Alexander , Burr & Romney will rise to the level of statesmen and place country above poltics & fear of being tweeted by an out of control Trump. This could become even more off the wall than it has been especially when Trump gives his State of the Union address. Which Trump will be present? The Trump reading a speech in which he sounds like a hostage reading a statement? Maybe it will be be the uncensored on the road Trump? Maybe the State of the Union will be similiar to the Pelosi letter ? In the meantime thank you Senator Murkowski for at least thinking & not jumping to the dictates of the Grim Reaper from Kentucky & Don the Con Trump .
3
To call 1 Republican being "disturbed" a "stirring of conscience" is a bit overblown, in my opinion. Mitch McConell has done more to destroy the American structure of government than any other single politician. When he invoked the nuclear option, he effectively politicized the Supreme Court. During the Obama era, he led the GOP to unanimously stand against the elected president. Now, he and the entire Republican party are colluding with the President. Three independent branches of government is lost, and alas, I see no way it will ever be restored. I sincerely fear that the American experiment has come to an end.
10
Political tactics or the search for truth are in the eyes of the beholder.
2
Credit where it's due to Sen Murkowski - well done!
Regardless of what happens next, it takes courage to be the first and (so far) the only Republican to stand up and speak out against your own leadership.
2
As usual republicans get praised for doing the bare minimum expected. This is what got Trump elected.
15
Mr. Trump - never a wall flower - should demonstrate presidentia leadership and immediately testify under oath. We can be assured his testimony would be self-described as "BEAUTIFUL."
5
Republicans of conscience could have rid us of Trump 3 years ago. His crimes were evident from day one and should have been dealt with in 2017. But he gave them judges. He gave them tax cuts. He gave them deregulation. But above all, he gave them cover. While attention was focused on the Tangerine Tyrant, McConnell and Ryan were quietly refashioning the country from a democracy to an oligarchy, eternally ruled by the white male minority.
Murkowski is a lone voice, and will likely remain a lone voice. McConnell will find a way to let Trump off the hook. And then will turn to his propagandists to make sure it is all forgotten by November.
16
The House should now go ahead with passing a motion of censure of Trump. There is no Senate exoneration from a motion of censure
passed in the House of Representatives. I think this is what most members had in mind in the first place.
6
Term Limits. Without term limits Senators act not in the best interests of the country or their constituents but rather in ways they believe are most likely to get them re-elected. For the Senate three six year terms should be the maximum.
17
@Judy Yes we need term limits for senators; for senators and judges, especially the justices of the Supreme Court. Initially, it was intended that lifetime appointments would prevent strong political influence over the justices, but just look at how that worked out!
2
term limits end of citizens United = a chance for democracy
2
Regarding the piece: A Senator with a history of contradicting her party's official line stating that she's opposed to an obvious violation of Senate duty is not a crack in the conference. If a Senator who always toes the party line had done the same, then that could be considered a crack in the conference. I'm optimistic but that has nothing to do with Murkowski.
Regarding the trial: If the GOP and Trump wants to prove that the impeachment is a 'sham' then they most certainly would want to have witnesses from the White House testify. That's their team. After all, according to their line they've done nothing wrong, and therefore there shouldn't be any reason why they wouldn't want people from their groups to testify. Right?
13
Mr. McConnell has way too much power. Any legislation is subject to his whim and we are all the worse for it. I feel as though being held hostage for some crime I did not commit.
Dear Kentuckians, do the right thing. Vote him out. For the good of the republic.
25
I've heard this before. Senators Flake, Murkowski, and Collins all stated their concerns re: Brett Kavanaugh. In the end, they all towed the party line. I'm not interested in what Murkowski or anyone else has to say. It's what they do if the impeachment were they to go to the Senate trial and to vote.
17
These 3 names would fit perfectly in a party like the 5 Star Movement in Italy. After governing 18 months with the far right they changed tack literally within days and joined the very left leaning Democratic Party, a Party they had insulted for years up to the very last day before joining them. It’s perfectly OK to challenge your party’s line, but doing it consistently and repeatedly in the public domain exudes a strong smell of opportunism.
2
Actually, Murkowski voted against Kavanaugh.
You did read the article, yes?
1
Looking at Republicans in Congress makes me feel the same way I did earlier today, when I visited a store that's going under but won't admit it: all that denial in the face of glaring emptiness inside is heartbreaking. You wish there was a way to make it better, but you know it's not going to happen.
But unlike that store, elected Republicans and their supporters have the potential to drag us all down with them.
So I'll believe that Lisa Murkowski is genuinely concerned about a fair trial and the facts when I see her voting in accordance with them. Until then....well, I fear that she speaks empty words.
17
While I empathize with the skeptical comments of many readers, realize the likelihood that the Senate will ultimately not vote to remove Trump, and agree that the 2020 election will be the best opportunity to remove Trump, Murkowski's actions need to be affirmed and may be a catalyst for a fair process. The impeachment process is necessary to clarify the centrality of our Constitution in preserving our democracy, never so at risk in modern times than under this president. I applaud Nancy Pelosi's steady hand in leading this process and not allowing McConnell to make a mockery of the solid work from the impeachment hearings. Perhaps Murkowski will encourage enough "moderate" Republicans (if such a thing exists) to join her and vote for a fair process. A senate trial with witnesses may help awaken more of the public to what's at stake here--our democracy.
8
I believe that there are Republicans in the Senate who are decent people. I hope that they find the courage to simply do the right thing by their own judgement.
6
@David Blazer Don't hold your breath.
2
We've spent over three years waiting with bated breath--and with hopes raised only to be soundly dashed--for one single Republican to show even a shred of decency and decide to do the right thing when it actually counted. It hasn't happened yet, and it's not going to. Focus on getting the vote out in November. It is our only hope.
15
If there is to be any demonstration of courage by Senate Republicans, then full disclosure must be made to the public as to the extent to which Donald Trump, Make America Great PAC, foreign lobbyists (especially Saudi Arabia, China, Russia) and their operatives (as in straw man donors), and multi-national corporations have funneled money into various Republican senators. Full disclosure will demonstrate who is "owned" by Trump - no different than the corrupt Chicago justice and police in the 1920's when mobsters ran the city.
Donald Trump is the modern day equivalent of the criminal syndicate boss. Lavish in spreading his money about, providing favors where needed and promises when asked, and also having a treasure trove of "dirt" on each Republican Senator. Amalgamate all of these levers of political scandal and it becomes increasingly clear why there is no resistance to Trump and the absolute damaging policy and personal actions. These Senators have been bought.
How many have been bought? I don't know. If you want to start on a trail as who has a string on their back, look at Senators who radically changed their outlook.
9
Senator Lisa Murkowsky's case of listening to the voice of conscience while voting during the impeachment trial is praiseworthy yet, matters little when, the majority of the Senate Republicans will go against the conscience and vote blindly as their leader Mitch McConnell desires to protect Trump from all the heat and trouble come may what.
6
This might be off topic, yet somehow seems v relevant in terms of GOP's motives and effectiveness.
On Xmas Day this we, while in the hospital, my brother learned he had a blood cancer, Multiple Myeloma, which only has a success rate if Stem cell transfers are used. I am retired from Stanford U Med Dev and spent years of my career in the late 90s/eary 2000s advocating and fundraising for stem cell research while the GOP was Adamant against it. During this time, my sister and bro-n-law worked for the State Dept in Medicine overseas. They told me that the only reason Bush 1 and Bush 2, came out against Stem cell research was to rope in Evangelicals and present a case they could "buy into" bc it indirectly could relate to abortions.
Ta da, years of waste, labor, money, healing, and many deaths resulted bc of the GOP's need to rope in white (uninformed) evangelicals.
Today no one advocates against stem cell research even when it is a result of abortion.
Evil intent by the GOP on this issue as far as I'm concerned. Thank God eventually the research and treatments are allowed and now saving lives, like my brother's.
21
I'll believe it when I see it. But, for now, the Republicans in congress are aiding and abetting a hostile foreign power (Russia) in their quest to destabilize our own Democracy. And the reason they are doing that is to maintain their grip on political power in our government. To me, that IS the very definition of treason.
Republicans have NEVER been able to run on ideas (tax cuts for billionaires and massive deregulation of the financial sector and environment don't poll well, to say the least), so they need to misinform and deceive voters (Faux News carries most of the water here), and they also need to suppress votes. And we see this now happening systematically in battleground states with purges of the voting rolls. But, even with all that, they know that might not be enough to win in 2020. So they go the extra mile and sell out their own country to a hostile foreign power in order to help themselves maintain political power.
14
Well, thank you, Senator Murkowski. Now let's get this thing over with and don't be lazy get out and vote for anybody but Trump. Yes, the economy is good but having Trump make foreign Well, thank you, Senator Murkowski. Now let's get this thing over with and don't be lazy get out and vote for anybody but Trump. Yes the economy is good but having Well, thank you, Senator Murkowski. Now let's get this thing over with and don't be lazy get out and vote for anybody but Trump. Yes, the economy is good but having Trump make foreign Well, thank you, Senator Murkowski. Now let's get this thing over with and don't be lazy get out and vote for anybody but Trump. Yes, the economy is good but having Trump make the foreign policy you or rather we are taking our lives and putting it in Trump's hands. You better think about that. This guy does not have a clue about world policy issues.
2
@Richard sorry about the repeats. Its the word spell program. Just skip it and do not vote for Trump
10
Murkowski seems to have ignored the memo and has the naive idea that this trial is supposed to be a trial, not a Party party. You know: a trial with presentation of evidence, witnesses, testimony—that sort of thing.
If she gets the support she deserves from her constituents, maybe other Republican senators will find the courage to do the right thing too.
6
Earlier this year I called Senator Murkowski's D.C. office, as I am an Alaskan resident and her constituent, about some of my climate change fears as the Bering Sea and Gulf of Alaska were rapidly warming and this was only February. The young man who answered the telephone suggested that this would be SO great for shipping! He seemed to be unaware of the dire consequences of this warming for our place and people. Over the years I have come to believe that she has one constituent and that is oil. Trump is good for the oil industry. She thinks that is good for us. It never was. There is only more stuff and more people and more corruption. When you wonder what she will do, ask what will benefit the oil industry most of her possible actions. That is the answer. Senator Murkowski and the Republican Party here seem to have abandoned many other places, people and issues. Many islands and coastal communities have seen critical ferry connections cut or eliminated. There is silence as fisheries fail from overheated fish stocks and their food supplies. There is silence from Republicans as enormous numbers of birds and marine mammals die. There are no comments for the communities beginning to fail in the wake of all this...but, there are more and more opportunities to drill for oil and gas.
As everything begins to die from climate change, remember who denied us the future, who sided with Trump and denied all manner of truth. Stop trying to find hope in her actions.
37
AG Barr’s priorities are all askew. Here he is traveling the world chasing butterflies at trump’s behest when his focus should be on investigating McConnell (and his wife) for corruption.. At some point McConnell must have his day in court.
17
@John Townsend At some point AG Barr must have his day in court. Has America ever had such an overtly corrupt Attorney General?
5
On the best assumptions about them, it seems unwise to view Ms Murkowski's concerns about trial as anything remotely resembling a light at the end of the impeachment tunnel.
It's almost certainly way, way, way better to presume that they may even camouflage an oncoming train switched to the wrong track at full throttle and piloted by a sleep apnea sufferer who's been without a C-pap for some time.
An excess of caution? Perhaps. But in the world reflecting the acts and influences of PT for some time now, we've got a lot (more) to lose. Could even be a whale-sized lot.
4
Right.
Legacy senator appointed by her father.
Republican in Name Only.
Let’s get serious about fair and conflict of interest.
1
The headline here sounds like a dream. Perhaps, the Editorial Board may have a better idea how the GOP members in the Senate are going to act at the Trial.
How serious is Ms.Murkowski? What was she doing all this time? If Ms. Murkowski is really concerned, she should rally round those moderates in her party and convince them to do the right thing. Mr. McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader has openly declared his position, not to be impartial. While the president is on trial,
Mr. McConnell is including himself and his party together with the defendant. For all purposes, Mr. McConnell will be a Juror at the Trial. Where do we see a Juror openly taking the side of a defendant? This is unimaginable. Every member of the GOP should be reviewing their position, and their conscience. If only the president were to be a Democrat, and the GOP still holding a majority in the Senate, everything would have been different, and the trial would have concluded a while ago.
6
Not holding my breath on this one. We've already seen the playbook for this from Kavanaugh. The existential crisis for Republicans has not changed, nor have their policies/strategy in response to changing country demographics. Here is how it will go:
1) Enough Republicans will criticize the process to get a majority vote for a "more thorough" process (in Kavanaugh and its aftermath, we know what "more through" means to Republicans).
2) The Republicans will obfuscate and confuse throughout as per usual, while pushing the "more through" process along.(Roberts will have no real sway since he can be outvoted by 51 Senators.)
3) Finally, some Republicans will close by faking outrage and shouting about how the process has not been fair to Trump and that Trump has nothing to explain (no proved crime, in spite of what the impeachment language states).
4) Vote not to convict on the weight of Republican votes, with only enough abstentions to make sure McConnell keeps his majority in the Senate. (Remember: McConnell holds the some of thepursestrings for re-election efforts.)
10
A bolder act of patriotism is required--something dramatic and deeply principled and possessing a moral clarity that rings through loud and clear with the American public.
Lisa Murkowski should announce her own presidential campaign. She should primary Trump and she should boldly attempt to embody the conservative Republican ethos of Dwight David Eisenhower, the last morally acceptable Republican president in U.S. history. If anyone could do it, it is Lisa Murkowski.
If Lisa Murkowski opposes Trump in a run for the presidency, she could potentially save American democracy and perhaps even win the presidency in the process.
I hope she does it.
Otherwise, I think this is wishful thinking on the part of the New York Times to interpret one Republican senator's momentary--and very very tardy--gut check as a sign that the tide may be turning.
Sadly, the fact is, both the U.S. congress and American democracy have already been hijacked. Read William Greider's Who Will Tell the People for a refresher.
8
New NYT Editorial Board favored Republican.
I thought John McCain’s seat was taken by Romney.
Political career kiss of death either way.
I think this is called “damning with faint praise.”
3
When is loyalty treasonous in the USA? When it is against the Constitution of the USA.
(c) 2019
3
When it is an excuse for acquiescing in and defending abuse of power. And to what does one owe loyalty? Should it be blind and deaf? Country before party; the rule of law over an imperial presidency. That’s what characterizes American loyalty & is the whole point of a democracy. Yet so many slavishly pledge alliance to an amoral, hate-filled, cheater, grifter, and con man. So I ask you, to what exactly are you loyal?
1
It a bit pathetic how Lisa and Susan go up to the line but never cross
I wonder why they bother
Hey republicans, Say good bye to New England Let break up the country. They can keep South. No women will stay and it will be underwater soon. Then we can keep our New York values and tax dollars
16
This is sad. Can the NYT Editorial Board really be this gullible? It’s a game because she is facing a difficult re-election. This reads like it was written by one of her staffers. She is no profile in courage, trust me on that.
17
I find it hard to believe that members of the editorial board of the NYT are so naive that they actually think that any of these politicians are doing anything but towing the party line. I also find it below any journalistic standards the manner in which the NYT continues to portray Republicans and Trump in such a bias manner. There was a time in America when the only bias displayed by any journalist was limited to the editorial pages, unfortunately today bias is on display through out this paper daily!
1
It’s a little silly to criticize an article in the opinion pages for being in the opinion pages.
1
A Republican appears to have a stirring of conscience. This literally produces an NYT headline.
And the frogs continue to boil.
13
Let's find out what the Republican Senators' thoughts are about the rule of law regarding Trump's impeachable offenses;
Start with Mitch McConnell and quote him directly;
and then ask every GOP member of the Senate...and
put it on TV...for the entire world to see...just how defiant
the GOP of our US Constitution...make their answers public and
keep at it until these phony patriots fall on their knees and
wish they could escape their treasonous yellow bellied
declarations of defiance of their sworn oaths of office....
Let them fall down on their cowardly knees...!!!
7
I’m surprised that the Times Editorial Board has seemingly fallen for this Collins-esque display of public conscience searching. To paraphrase a quote from the last impeachment saga, follow the votes.
9
A very slender straw...
4
This kind of institutional editorial last had value in the 1950’s. Talking about a conscience in the Republican Senate? Are you in the land of unicorns and daffodils? This editorial presumes Republican senators care about truth, justice and the Constitution. What a delusional hoot. It would a far better use of paper and ink to scourge the criminal fascists who continue to support a narcissistic psychopath who is destroying the rule of law. Stop writing the fantasy about the law abiding Republican Party. That is a lie.
16
How many US senators have been mesmerized by this snake ?
How many Americans are going to continue to parrot his hate, white supremacist sympathies and sheer foulness ?
we're going to see how deep this depravity runs in the GOP during this trial. And there will be a trial.
Trump is like a cornbread animal now. His viciousness will get worse. The cowardly US Navy Captain who is his personal physician an d hasn't had him psychiatrical evaluated is just one coward who hasn't had the nerve to call a spade a spade. This president is a threat to America , our democracy and to America's citizens.
14
Ha, ha, ha! Republicans aren't Republicans anymore, they are minions of Trump on which their reelection hopes lie. Cross Trump in any way, and a person will arise to challenge your "Trump" purity in a primary. And you will lose unless your challenger is a complete nitwit (or a pedophile or the like).
So please stop wasting everyone's time by writing foolish editorials.
The Republican party has died because its soul has died.
9
In a Newsweek article today, Peter Roff claimed that "there's no requirement in the Constitution that senators be impartial." He's dead wrong about this, and I'm shocked that Newsweek allowed such a blatant lie to be published. Rule XXV of the Senate Rules in Impeachment Trials provides the text: ”I solemnly swear (or affirm) that in all things appertaining to the trial of ____, now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws, so help me God.” If Republicans openly admit to thumbing their nose at this oath, then they should be recused. The fact that Peter Roff felt emboldened enough to make the claim, in a respected national publication, that impartiality is not required just shows how deep the rot of open falsehoods has infected GOP norms. We expect uneducated soldiers to stand by their oath of enlistment throughout their military careers, and if they fail, we dishonorably discharge them from their duties. I'm not surprised that Senate Republicans believe they are more important than our troops and that oaths and rules only apply to less important people.
12
McConnell and Graham have disqualified themselves as jurors.
Trump is an idiot. It is time to administer a citizenship test and see if he has the faintest clue about how our government works.
Get his taxes and let's give this guy the royal boot.
15
People have said in the past that the US Senate is the deliberative body in Congress, while the US House, it is said, is a pragmatic, even William James-like body. The House observed Trump’s behavior over and again, until he snubbed his nose at the public and deliberately broke the law. No pragmatist is going to countenance that. The Senate, however, is not now a deliberative body, rather, it is hostage to an oligarchy of corporate interests and fear. As with academics, it is a fear of embarrassment and of becoming poor (relatively speaking of course) when their malfeasance finally emerges from the maelstrom that is Washington, DC. They will do anything, I say again, anything to prevent this from happening. When you sleep with dogs, don’t be whining when you get fleas and ticks; Trump, like ticks, scurries to the top of grass and weeds on rainy days, all the better to attach to human legs and suck their blood.
5
The day Republicans vote against their Dear Leader will be the same day the North Koreans impeach Kim Jong Un.
That's just how Fascism works, but let's just call it Authoritarianism, which the New York times prefers because it sounds much nicer, and more "balanced". Sort of more just like a stern Daddy that the other famous Fascists of History.
Amazing that the New York Times keeps trying to dress up Fascism in more contemporary clothing.
8
Talk is cheap.
4
Is this a joke?
3
Good Grief! Why can't anyone just recognize the fact that **Congress Is On Vacation** until Jan 6th! What is so hard about that to understand? Give Pelosi at least until that week or two before folks start attacking her!
This is ridiculous and she has proven to be a pretty wise woman of integrity in this mess she tried to avoid in the beginning!
6
So many people are hoping that somewhere, somehow some truly damning evidence will appear. A document. A DNA test of a love child. Someone who will finally violate a nondisclosure agreement. This man is not so smart as to never have made a mistake in his cover-ups. Then, there are the people who surround him, who are likewise not the brightest bulbs on the holiday light strings. Where is that one item of disgust that will turn enough marginal supporters on the basis of embarrassment? Or is it a game to be won by the person who is loudest in shouting, most aggressive in name calling and most amoral? What would Hamilton and Madison think of such a situation?
4
I like the suggestion of poodlefree, to have Pelosi hold off until after the 2020 election to give the Senate the House’s impeachment. It is so similar to what McConnell did with Obama’s Supreme Court nomination. Give him a taste of his own medicine. And if the Senate swings back to the Democrats, wait until they join the Senate. Plus, the delay may surface more and more damning information.
7
Totally spineless people playing games.
Susan Collins next,
Your editors should know better.
But this type of “editorials” sell centrist hope, rhetoric and papers.
4
Don't worry. We've got some long tall Texas Senators. They enforce justice for the law. Their word is their bond. They will put their country over party. They would rather get beat in their upcoming election than to put Trump ahead of the constitution. They don't have to suck up to Trump. They could be hunting elk and managing their stock portfolios.They ain't afraid of no man, especially some washed up jerk working for the devil. They'll stand up for our constitution. Y'all wait and see.
2
Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz?? Oy.
1
"At least one Republican, Lisa Murkowski, wants the Trump impeachment trial to be more than a test of party loyalty. Others should follow."
Does that mean that hose couple of defector Dems who did not vote for Trump's House impeachment had a "stirring of conscience"?
I really don't understand why the NYT believes that partisanship is an OK standard for the House impeachment "investigation," but not for the Republicans in the Senate.
Really, aren't the Republican senators merely canceling out the partisanship of the House Dems?
McConnell should force a change in the Senate rules by majority vote, citing Pelosi's gamesmanship with the Articles. The Senate should move to dismiss the Articles with prejudice, make a Record of Pelosi's "failure to prosecute" and move on.
2
Just talk -- means NOTHING. Not one single Republican in the Senate will vote to remove this criminal and treasonous President, no matter what he does.
7
Kangaroo Court. We all heard about it in high school and in our law-based country, we knew it never happened here.
Until now.
21
@MichiganMichael
Mike, Mike, Mike.
What would you have called the House hearings if it had been Hillary in trouble.
Thought so.
1
I suppose if we can believe that the CBC only edited out the scene of Trump in its showing of Home Alone 2 strictly due to airing time constraints then I suppose we can also believe that the Democratically controlled House’s impeachment inquiry of him was completely fair, impartial and unrushed as well.
3
@John Doe The inquiry was the same as a grand jury inquiry, although, unlike a grand jury, it was held in public! And, the WH and the "president" were repeatedly asked to participate, but REFUSED, would not provide subpoenaed documents, nor allow subpoenaed officials to testify.
Don't try to pretend they didn't understand the rules of the process, which were followed as directed by the Constitution.
The Canadians are obviously held to a higher standard of decency than are we.
28
@John Doe The CBC edit happened back in 2014, long before Mr. Trump was in politics (other than to continually accuse Obama of not being 'an American')
26
@John Doe: You are burying your head in the sand because you refuse to acknowledge that the REpublicans in the House refused to take any part in the Impeachment investigation and tried very hard to keep witnesses from testifying. It is immoral and dishonest t for any Republican or Trumpista to claim that the House impeachment investigation was unfair, partial and rushed. One cannot refuse to put on a defense then cry that the result was rigged.
5
The fair Belle of Bar Harbour ME weighs in on due process? Go figure!
6
As we saw with the Kavanaugh hearing, Murkowski and Collins are just talk, but in the end will back the Republican agenda. Don't get your hopes up.
5
How constitutional it is for a speaker of the house to demand rules of a trial in the House? Just because she can and even after ramming articles through the House. Everyone knows that the charges are laughable. McConnell should just do his job and not show his sycophancy.
1
The problem falls to John Roberts now. He’s got McConnell and Graham announcing serious bias against the oath they must take. He needs to eliminate them as jurors.
5
Liberals, don't get too excited about this. It's not the start of some crumbling of Republican solidarity.
Lisa Murkowski is a closet Democrat. She just runs as a Republican to get elected in Alaska.
She never endorsed Donald Trump as the Republican candidate in 2016, nor did she support him.
She voted against Kavanaugh for Supreme Court.
She voted against a ban on taxpayer funded abortions…
This is just another manifestation of her true character. She’s a Democrat. ;)
2
i really did think that this was an opportunity for many Republicans to reclaim their lives and their souls and their legacy. When dealing with someone as cruel as our current President, it's hard to have the courage and tenacity to refuse your allegiance.
But i am growing weary of the media's coverage.
In an attempt to give equal time to both sides, i find this kind of story almost ridiculous.
Murkowski has voted 74% of the time in line with Trump's party line.
I wouldn't be surprised if she has McConnell's blessing to say what she is saying. He gives her back room assurance that she will not be shunned, so she gets the Trump vote, and McConnell has someone making noise to keep the heat off of him.
It's rich theater, but absolutely sickening.
We are so close to losing our position in the world.
I do have to say, another piece that never seems to be mentioned is how much we have interfered in the elections of dozens of countries all over the world, but especially in this hemisphere.
Maybe it's our karmic debt, or if you don't believe in karma, what goes around comes around.
2
A Profile in Courage ---Perhaps?
1
Lisa Murkowski the the diamond flaw in a cubic zirconian senate.
1
“Why should Crazy Nancy Pelosi, just because she has a slight majority in the House, be allowed to Impeach the President of the United States?” he tweeted.
Why do we let an Electoral College allow you to be president when 3 million more voted for your opponent?
Why are presidents immune from criminal prosecution even when they blatantly break the law (remember your former attorney?)
Why should senior advisors who can't qualify for top secret clearance be allowed to stay just because they are related to you?
So many whys. So few answers. To use Trump's latest word of the day, it is so UNFAIR!
8
Donald Trump once said he could shoot someone on 5th Ave. and not lose any of his supporters. Well, he just shot Ukraine on 5th Ave (figuratively), with a dozen witnesses and even by his own words. Yet, Republicans and conservatives cover their eyes and ears to avoid acknowledging the obvious.
2
In the end, she'll probably wimp out and vote "present" like she did with Kavanaugh. That's what women Republicans apparently do when the want to "make a strong statement"....
2
Republican conscience stirred, perhaps, but certainly not shaken. Their Senate cohort, of course, has a licence to kill impeachments.
2
The disturbance in the force does not in any way clear Ms Murkowski of her moral complicity with the GOP. She only said his remarks about working closely with the Whitehouse were disturbing knowing full well that he and Graham cracker declared what the verdict will be. Why has no one followed up with asking for her opinion about that?
Why haven't the Editors written an article that demands McConnell and Graham and that other guy who also looks a bit like a turtle whose name eludes me be removed as jurors for the trial since they have openly declared they are working with the defense and told us how they would vote!?
Honestly you should be talking about how they can be removed from office for openly flouting the constitution and violating their oaths.
Between this and the other article about Murkowski as if her tone deaf half hearted remarks meant something real, Press malfeasance hardly come close here. Collusion seems like a good word to use.
Who cares? Murcowski is a lone wolf. If some other Republican had raised the issue, it might be news. Both parties are irrelevant.
Won’t believe it until she actually does something. She might just be another Susan Collins. Hope not.
We have been there before, Murkowski will make a lot of noise, get a lot of press, but in the end, she will fold as before.
4
Do not be surprised -- there are many Republican senators with every port in their souls wide open right now, looking for a way to come in from the storm. Some do not want to let the opportunity slip away. They come out, and 5 will get you 10 Trump folds w/o the trial. Like Nixon.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch is saying, in relation to Constitutional and Senate Rules where the Senate is to decide in the Senate-run trial, where the Senate is also judge and jury, an indictment of the President prepared by the independent House of Representatives, that in doing so the Senate will not hear any prosecution witnesses, only witnesses for the defense, and will work directly with defense lawyers and the President (aka the defendant in the trial).
How can anyone even suggest how this can be a fair trial? Only if, basically, they believe the case can be dismissed for secret reasons.
2
"she does not want to be viewed as a rubber stamp for a preordained acquittal."
Basic rule of life: no one should allow himself to be viewed as a rubber stamp for any preordained outcome.
That doesn't mean I believe Ms. Murkowski or any Republican, especially with regard to any notion of conscience.
1
Murkowski could play her cards right and wind up the Republican nominee in 2020. But I'm inclined to agree with posters here saying that after; "yet she persisted"; we will see; "but she fell in line". Very Republican. Mukowski has a shot here at national prominence. She's also from a state that supports both rapacious corporations AND environmental sanity. It's not a very tricky line she needs to negotiate.
2
Well let us think about this for a a bit:
a) It cannot be denied that there were Representatives
that wanted Trump impeached before any inquiry was begun.
b) It cannot be denied that the WB knew a member of the staff of Congressman Schiff to whom he delivered his report.
c) That Speaker Pelosi wanted the Articles of Impeachment
approved before Christmas.
d) That anyone has a right to appeal to the Federal Courts when subpoenaed by Congress.
e) That anyone being impeached has a right to Due Process even if he is Donald Trump.
The Democrats did not handle this matter well. A few more witnesses from the White House, though it might have taken going to the Supreme Court to get them to testify, might have been sufficient to convince 60 % or more of the public that Trump deserves to be Impeached and Removed from office.
Timing is everything in Politics.
Personally, I think the Republican Elites who could never stand Trump or hoping to convince enough Senators that Trump should be removed now before he leads the GOP to massive defeat in November.
I think the Democrat Elites know this and via Speaker Pelosi, an Elite herself, would like to make deal. Without Trump to energize them the Left cannot get either Warren or Bernie chosen to be the Nominee in the Polls, and with Trump out of office, no investigation of Biden will take place, thus Biden is the Nominee and the Democrats take back the White House and Biden, being so beholden to the Elites is a "Safe President".
1
How can McConnell possibly preside over a fair trial when his wife is a member of the Cabinet? Why doesn’t this blatant conflict of interest get more attention ? He shouldn’t even be allowed a vote.
6
Suppose in the previous American presidential impeachments the parties would have stayed in lock-step, as McConnell suggests now.
1) Andrew Johnson would have been tried in the Senate and removed from office.
2) Nixon would have stayed in office after his trial.
3) Clinton would also have stayed in office.
Because individual senators chose to vote their consciences, the results were somewhat different, particularly for Johnson and Nixon.
Either the Senate is the deliberative body the Founders sought to create or it is a bunch of political hacks seeking power for their party and their leaders whatever the damage to our country. The choice is either endless grubbing for power in the swamp or honorable courage.
Do The Right Thing.
2
You are fairly careful to talk only about removal from office, but you do falter in the last paragraph and mention acquittal. It should be noted that according to the Constitution the trial in the Senate deals only with removal from office and does not make a decision on the guilt or innocence of the President. To quote from Article I, Section 3: "Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to the Law."
To understand this, we only have to remember the Clinton Impeachment and Senate trial. The Senate did not remove Clinton from office, but no one considers Clinton acquitted or innocent.
2
I remember how "concerned" Murkowski was about the negative effect that the billionaire tax giveaway would have on the deficit. Somehow she found a way to support it in the end. This will be no different!
8
There is no big stirring of Conscience,nada, none! I am grinning at how smart I am in seeing through the whole little charade she is playing out. And I think the editorial board knows it too. Anyway how can this be, the editorial board is certainly more experienced in politics than I am, easily more educated and I am smart but no genius. It is a theater piece pure and simple, I said that before here but alas it was not printed. So I go bolder.
Now if she said " Yep he did it, clear as a can be, he has got to go" I would be impressed. And she would be agreeing with the polls which say that 55% of Americans believe trump should be impeached AND removed from office. 10 to 1 that Mitch is in on this dramady for his own nefarious reasons,
6
Placing political parties aside is the act of patriotism. The guiding principal should be the U.S. constitution. Patriots place their country first and many have paid the ultimate sacrifice to protect us from enemies both foreign and domestic. These patriots are who we honor, not political parties or self-proclaimed gods or rulers.
Now, we are faced with duty to our Constitution. Those who believe our constitution is a scam, are fallen angles of political propaganda, not patriots. Patriotism is not a test of party loyalty, it's a test of our Constitutional duty.
I hope Susan Collins is reading this. Otherwise, Lisa Murkowski will steal all her "I'm pretending to be independent and open-minded but, in the end, you know I'm going to vote the Trump line." thunder. Clap back.
2
I'll believe it when I see the votes. Conscience is in short supply among Republicans, when it comes time to put up or shut up.
9
Could this be a Mrs. Smith Goes to Washington moment?
Mitch McConnell is setting this up to be the most crooked trial in the history of the United States.
6
Donald Trump is unfit for his office. He’s a liar, a con man and a fraud. He’s done more damage to our country in three years than I ever would have thought possible. He’s toxic and destructive.
But despite all of this, there is something that I won’t allow Trump to damage — my belief that most people are decent, fair and trustworthy. I remain optomistic about our national future.
I’m inspired by Senator Murkowski’s courage and dare to hope that other Republican senators will break away from the current lockstep Republican folly. That they’ll find the strength to embrace fairness and impartiality.
Daring to believe in our countrymen, hoping for the best, encouraging the valiant — these actions cost nothing. Hope is often an integral step in solving problems.
1
Nonsense. Murkowski is carrying McConnell's water again. She wanted the House to hold out for witnesses the republicans had no interest in releasing. Wait for the courts, Murkowski said. Yea, right. Trump owns 1/4th of federal judges. They are all part of the delay tactics. Nice Try Lisa! Not again.
5
Few "Profiles in Courage" among this lot.
2
The Myth of the Reasonable Republican.
2
Yes, McConnell is a hypocrite; and he has severely damaged the integrity of the Senate and our very democracy by his shenanigans.
But all it takes is a very few Senators who took the same oath that McConnell did to say "Enough is enough."
They could easily end this nonsense by simply saying they are caucusing with the Dems...they don't even have to change their party membership.
I know, this would be political suicide in so many ways....but what is "political" suicide when compared to aiding and abetting the farcical dismantling of our republic and its democratic norms.
1
This is a stirring of conscience? One senator is disturbed? Disturbed? That’s it?
8
So the Republican Party has 1 woman who shows a profile in courage. Is that it??
When Republican politicians are allowed to vote their conscience without fear of punishment by their party--instead of what Mr. Trump and Mitch McConnell order them to do--then the GOP will back on the road to democracy.
But if you prefer fascism and dictatorship to democracy, then I guess you will be voting Republican in 2020.
6
It is patently naieve to take any Republican politician in Congress at their word.
Mukowskis is simply setting the table for a bargaining of some sort for the benefit of her and her state. Nothing more, nothing less... because this is exactly the way the game is played in the Senate.
5
It is heartening to know at least one Republican has qualms about Mad Mitch’s flagrant disregard of truth and fairness.
1
Sadly, we have a wild-child in our White House, with no sense of propriety or decorum, instead of a steadfast honorable leader. America deserves better. So sad!
1
If there are no GOP senators willing to follow Sen .Murkowski then they all are profoundly immoral and a disgrace to our Democracy. Kick all the GOP out of office. They are only partisan none are true patriots. Especially if they are afraid to wear our Army uniform and fight in the wars they start.
Please publish another opinion article on Murkowski when she votes against Trump’s removal explaining how she is all talk and no action.
5
Lisa Murkowski again? That woman will say anything to pretend she is a decent human being. She's like Susan Collins making a sad face while gloatingly pulling the levers to betray the American people.
Can we finally see them for what they are and vote them out of office.
5
One hopes that she's toast, Can our leaders really say that she's "concerned" but not do the right thing?
3
We need to stop being delusional about republicans finally coming to their senses about Trump. It will never happen.
4
This is just another liberal fantasy that savior Republicans will come to their senses and turn agai st their oarty out of "conscience". Jeff Flake said it spot on when he said he disnt stoo being a Republican because he didn't like the way Trump talks. In the end, Republicans believe that the President is doing things they want done, even if he isn't saying it how they want to say it.
I did not find a stirring of conscience in the US House of Representative when the sham partisan impeachment based on zero evidence vote was opposed by the bipartisan minority. So far the only persons who have showed some stirring of congress was by one democrat from NJ and another from Minnesota who voted against and the congresswoman from Hawaii Rep. Tulsi Gabbard.
It is no surprise that the mouth piece of the democratic party the NY Times editorial board all of a sudden is talking of conscience in the senate. Every person deserves their day for a fair trial. No one in this country should be impeached just because a mob of mafiosos want to impeach a president. The president is not below the law.
Senator Murkowski is raising hopes for the NYT editorial board because she voted against the confirmation of Justice Kavanaugh. Not a single other Republican followed her and Justice Kavanaugh is doing a fine job and a decent man as Justice RBG has said. While Lisa knows there is a thriving lucrative media and press market for anti-Trump cabal, this time her vote is not critical. Senator Manchin of W. Virgina and Sen. Doug Jones of Alabama both Democrats will cross over not because they love Trump but because they cannot support an impeachment charade with ZERO credible evidence of even low crimes leave alone high crimes.
Lisa Murkowski wants the trial to be fair to the accused as well as the accusers and I don't think Sen. Mitch McConnell of KY wants to do it differently.
2
Maybe Senator Murkowski should seek the Republican nomination for President.
It's a shame that the GOP is so constrained by knee-jerk loyalty (or so instinctively amoral) that it is acting against its own self-interest.
Trump is not an asset to the Party. Outside of his intense (but minor in size) voter base, there is little voter respect for his crude lying/bragging/insulting/cruel/vacuous style. His universe of initiatives is pretty much limited to court packing, aerial bombing, sanctions, and tariffs. Staff loyalty supersedes staff competence. A climate denier standing tall against the progressively dour predictions of habitat destruction and the resulting civil calamities.
The worst part is that he has molded the GOP to into an obedient puppy that cherishes its master. His limitations and inadequacies are now the Party's.
The upcoming trial is a one time opportunity to rid the Party of this bondage, and get on with the needs of the country is a serious, open, and frank way. Maybe even some bipartisanship.
If the Senate were to allow a secret ballot on the guilt or innocence of Trump at his Senate trial, you might be surprised as to how many Republican Senators thought it was time for Trump to go.
The House "impeachment" circus failed to convince even one person from the minority party to vote for the sham articles, neither of which assert that an actual criminal statute was violated. The process was entirely political from the beginning and the final vote showed as much. Is it really a surprise that the unserious farce cooked up in the House will be given an unserious brushoff in the Senate?
The GOP stopped caring about the Constitution, the rule of law and ethics many years ago. Trump really could shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and get away with it. Our nation is lost. If the Dems do not win back the WH in 2020, our nation is doomed.
2
The Republicans in the Senate have been unwilling to defend our democracy. I have little hope that they will acknowledge trump’s crimes and misdemeanors. I believe that they along with trump must be thrown out of office by an overwhelming number of votes for democratic candidates. We must rid our government of trump toadies. America is worth saving. Vote Blue. Love America. Save Democracy.
Ms. Murkowski, Susan Collins, Mitt Romney... they all see what's going on and they're poisoned with it.
So are many, many others.
2
Toss a small stone into the water and watch the ever extending ripples.
Praise be to all who speak their questions.
If Murkowski was truly "disturbed" she would switch parties and caucus with the Democrats -- just like the courageous Vermont Senator Jim Jeffords in 2001. True integrity means you can't have it both ways.
1
Senator Murkowski's expression of concern (the Senator is "disturbed") are so faint a stir that they would not even cause the tiniest movement of an aspen leaf.
4
I think Pelosi is doing the right thing, delaying sending articles to the Senate. McConnell made it crystal clear that the outcome has already been decided. I hope she delays until the Senate can guarantee a fair hearing. It makes my blood boil to hear Republicans complain of hypocrisy and partisanship.
2
NONSENSE, Murkowski always makes nice noises but when it comes time to vote she steps right in line with McConnell
3
What don't you accept nor understand that as long as the Republican Party represents the white European American voting majority there is no incentive for any Republican Party majority Senator to move beyond mealy mouth deception and duplicity regarding the Trump impeachment trial?
Obama/Biden won 43% and 41% of the white European American vote in 2008 and 2012. While Clinton/ Kaine won 42% of white European American vote in 2016.
Jeff Flake and Bob Corker fleeing into retirement is what the Republican Senators fear. John McCain dying is no more an appealing of an option. The Republicans in the Senate run from being in a primary with a candidate backed by Trump.
Lisa Murkowski is rebelling against the appearance of impropriety and unfairness. She is not going to vote to convict Trump. Mitch McConnell made his move way too open and way too soon..That can be fixed.
2
Start a trend, Senator. Let's see if there are any other brave souls with spines and consciences who dare to join you.
1
Murkowski will eventually fall in line, she's pulling a Susan Collins here, pretending to be a centrist but is still 150% loyal to the trump/McConnell GOP.
This guy trump is acting like an immature spoiled child, having a barn-burner of a temper tantrum.
2
Interesting that most of the political base has stayed with this insane asylum president of he US.
In 2020 they will get there vote of confidence or not.
Hopefully the American people will realize what a flaw the republican party is.
Not-American to the core but trump supporters of a dismal being in the WH. Think about it.
2
It is a sad comment on the times when Sen. Murkowski's desire to be evenhanded, withhold judgment and make an informed decision based on the case presented is applauded as something 'novel'. The senate really has become an unrepresentative body of swill, to paraphrase former Australian PM Paul Keating. He may have been referring to the Australian senate, but his epithet aptly describes the US upper chamber.
1
This says others should follow. It means only Republicans.
The Editorial Board would be appalled at the notion of any Democrat not voting automatically for conviction.
That might be the right outcome, but the blatant hypocrisy of "Republicans should think independently, but not Democrats" is just nauseating.
2
Can we be frank here? If it weren't for the total concentration of wealth, and as a result power, in this country none of this would be happening. It'd be like if you lived in a town and this own family controlled everything, including your Mayor. Do you really expect them to step out of line? The whole thing is rotten to the core. At least some Democrats are speaking truth to power, but it's far and in between. It's all disgusting, but you know what? I have to go back to work making $13/hour, so bye!
1
She is a Democrat without the courage to admit it.
1
It will be interesting to see if the NY Times will express the same praise for any Democrat who bravely goes against their party's partisan approach.
The partisanship - on BOTH sides of this issue - is over the top.
between her and Pelosi one can easily get the impression that women in the House and Senate are more professional, thoughtful and determined to handle this impeacment in the professional manner it deserves.
In the case of the men. they remind me of fraternity members standing by the side of their frat brethren no matter what the facts present.
4
Where is Susan Collins on this subject? She needs to be voted out of the Senate along with just a few others so we can finally take away the Grim Reaper's scythe.
2
Murkowski can be disturbed. Collins can be outraged. All great for the cameras but at the end of the day they will fall in line and vote according to McConnel’s marching order. The implication of this headline is simply wishful thinking.
1236
@Patrick. I do not doubt that there are many GOP senators who do not like McConnell any more than they do Trump. They must be sick of his weaseling.
25
@Patrick. You are right with your assessment. If the GOP senators really cared about the Constitution and the health of our Republic, they would come out in droves and convict him for high crimes and misdemeanors.
But they won't because they rather deal with an unhinged president than face their voters and justify why it was necessary to remove him.
58
@Patrick. Agreed. If they were serious about their reservations, they could change parties like Arlen Spector did, but I'm not holding my breath until that happens!
In the meantime, I'm waiting for the Elliot Richardson of this administration to appear, but that could be a while too.
10
There's no disparity in Mitch McConnell's behavior. His ONLY value is power, his only ethic is power, his only morality is power. Anything that increases power is good, anything that costs power is bad. It's just that simple.
So he will do and say anything, invoke or ignore any rule, as long as it enhances his and Republican power.
As long as there aren't 3, or worse, 4 Republican Senators willing to buck McConnell on his bizarre rules for the Impeachment trial, he can afford to let Lisa Murkowski forge a path of independence. Even if Susan Collins (aka "Lucy and the Football") comes along (she won't) McConnell STILL has 51 votes to ensure the trial is a travesty. But if, say, Mitt Romney were to join them, McConnell and Trump would be in trouble as Justice Roberts, not VP Pence, would cast the key vote. And Roberts clearly finds Trump offensive, and would be far more law-based than Trump-fealty based.
But if, by some miracle, 4 GOP senators side with Democrats on bringing in witnesses and testimony, and witnesses like Bolton et al must appear, things could get very, very bad for Trump, even if he is acquitted. All he has hidden will be stripped away and all but his 40% will see just how criminal and unfit he is.
I don't care how Trump leaves office, as long as on January 20, 2021, a Democrat is inaugurated.
3
My heart hopes this is meaningful.
My head tells me it's Republican kabuki.
812
What does your gut tell you?
7
This country deserves much better than McConnell putting on a show while he colludes with the White House to shove yet more of Trump’s transgressions under the rug. He is playing with fire in terms of this country’s future, and the future viability of our Constitutional checks and balances.
551
@WesternMass.
McConnell will be dead and gone and this country will still be suffering from his actions. He thinks he has all the power and he loves it, he is drunk with it. He can even control Trump if he decides to. He could make Trump squirm if he decides to conduct a real Senate Impeachment trial.
42
@WesternMass., I believe based on his repeated unpatriotic and immoral actions that McConnell is as bad a traitor as Trump. Most people started realizing that when his vow to make Pres. Obama a one-term president became widespread knowledge and again when the Merrick Garland nomination was stonewalled. He will not allow a fair and "full-featured" trial in the Senate unless forced into it, but I believe he can be as a few responsible Republicans come to realize that their reputations will be in tatters if they don't.
32
If I were to read about a court case in which the judge publicly stated the verdict before the trial took place, where witnesses were not allowed to testify, and where evidence was not permitted, I would assume I was reading about a country under authoritarian rule. I have never been so concerned about our future. Our hope? 2020.
4
@Lulurose
I know of such a case! Lewis Carroll wrote about when he had the Queen of Hearts demand a sentence before the verdict. I think that was "Through the Looking Glass" but won't swear to it.
But, of course, that was fiction, not Washington, DC.
1
Maybe the stage was set when the Washington Post began running a Democratic "resistance" authored Op-Ed demanding Trump's impeachment less than one hour after his inauguration? (This actually happened and can be independently verified.) If it weren't for all the partisian hypocrisy, the NYT comments section ( as well as much of its political "reporting") would be significantly shortened.
Of course others should follow, but they won't. VOTE BLUE NO MATTER WHO. And volunteer in key states, door to door or phone banking.
3
The Republican Party is driven by a populist movement heading ever further toward the right. Trump in effect has his foot on accelerator. It seems that Murkowski is trying to apply the break to slow things down. Perhaps she is asking herself whether her party really wants to head to complete authoritarian rule and perhaps fascism. And if she isn't asking herself that she should be. Caught up in the Trump whirlwind some Republicans need to stop simply going along and take stock of what is going on.
3
I would recommend caution about getting one’s hopes up. Concerns may be voiced and pearls may be clutched. But at the end of the day, one can always count on Republicans to disappoint and find an excuse to take the immoral choices on votes.
The so-called “moderates” have a well-established record of head-faking liberals on this front. This record is buffeted by the fact that they will occasionally oppose some of Trump’s most egregious judicial nominations when their vote is not needed for the nomination to pass.
Be extremely skeptical of any rumblings from the Senate moderates. I hope they do finally start to feel some moral responsibility and begin to act on it. But I will believe when I see it.
4
My sense of the Republican members of the Senate live in fear of Trump.
Here is a president who prides himself about violating the norms of our governmental institutions which reached back to the ratification of our Constitution.
Looking back to the year of 1954, the US Senate considered a motion of censure aimed at Senator Joseph R. McCarthy, Republican of Wisconsin.
Twenty-two Republican members of the Senate opted to support the censure motion, which was overwhelmingly approved.
Senators in 1954, not unlike 2019/2020, were fearful that McCarthy would wreak retribution upon them. To their great credit the broke with party-line partisanship to do the very best thing by supporting the motion.
I cannot believe that a handful or two of Republican members of the Senate will remain steadfast in supporting President Trump.
I have compiled my own list of possibilities: Alexander (TN), Collins (ME), Ernst (IA), McSally (AZ), Portman (OH), Romney (UT), Sasse (NB) in addition to Murkowski (Alaska).
These Republican members of the Senate might reflect on their place in this tragic chapter in our history.
How will they be remembered?
(A) handmaidens of Trump and Senator McConnell?
(B) courageous public officials who opted to stand apart from the thrall of Donald J. Trump and Mitch McConnell?
This is an consequential decision that will mark their places in American history.
Will they stand up for the historic American republic?
. . . or as Trump acolytes?
11
They should want to be remembered like Margaret Chase Smith, Senator from Maine (and a Republican), who criticized McCarthy before it was fashionable to do so.
We right now, have to deal with this. I have so much respect for historians, artists, journalists, reporters. I have less respect for bloggers, influencers, tweeters.. We can get beyond the fight of McConnell and Pelosi, we can get beyond djt. We as citizens, can hold the Supreme Court accountable, Justices can be removed, We can vote, We can call Facebook every day and tell them we do not agree with you, we can call every single representative and senator even if not in our own district, and tell them what we want. Very Simple. We do not need Facebook or twitter. Call your Congressperson, or Senator, and most of all, VOTE.
3
It doesn't really matter whether of not she would ultimately vote to convict Trump. What matters is how she will vote on the question of examining witnesses, most especially the four witnesses who stiffed the House Intelligence Committee at Trump's command. All it takes is for a thread to begin to unravel, and we'll find out in detail the truth of Ambassador Sondland's statement that this was a quid pro quo and everyone at the highest levels knew about it. So, just give us the vote to call witnesses, Lisa. We'll see how things play out from there. And Brava! for your standing up to this president.
8
As of this very moment, Democratic Presidential candidate Joe Biden has declared that he will not testify in a Senate impeachment trial, even if supoenaed. Yet it is his conduct and that of his son Hunter that is at the core of this latest imbroglio. Who wants to bet that Joe's supporters will twist themselves in rhetorical knots about how this is somehow "different" than Trump's advisors claiming Constitutionally protected Executive Privilige. Climb on down off that high-horse and accept that today's politicians are a dishonorable lot, regardless of party affilliation. They are interested in getting their own way and will do or say virtually anything to achieve that aim. No party and no politician has a lock on the unvarnishef truth or purity - quite the opposite actually. The likelihood that a politician is being disingenuos is directly proportional to how often they are speaking.
Murkowski may be the tip of an ice cube, or maybe more. McConnell's untoward vociferous Trump support, at a time when even he knows he ought to put on a sober face, demands an explanation. One possible reason could be less-than-rock-solid Senate Republican support for McConnell's preferred sham process, in which impeachment vanishes in a puff of procedural smoke. It would only take 4 defecting Republican Senators to give a Senate majority, and control of the trial, to Senate Democrats. A trial with witnesses, subpoenaed documents, and cross examination, could be a disaster for Trump. So McConnell is backpedaling and buying time.
4
Give Democrats "control" of the Senate trial? Because then their would certainly be a "fair" process and outcome - right? Just like the utterly sober and impartial circus "impeachment" in the House, where the intitial accusser still has not even been formally identified or questioned? Where potential witnesses with exculpatory testimony were never called? Who needs Due Process when the "process" is whatever one can get away with? Stalin would be so proud.
1
Trump is not just Orwellian in speech, he is Orwellian in thought, intent and action. I do not envy the Republican legislators the position they find themselves in. But, if they don't begin showing some circumspection soon, they will destroy their party and the country with it.
8
Conscience seems to be in short supply in our Republican Congress.
It should be a requirement.
6
Is Lisa Murkowski the one who acts conflicted and morally anguished but votes Trump all the way every time?
6
You’re thinking of Susan Collins; no, wait, maybe it is Lisa Murkowski. Who can tell the difference. They both faux agonize over moral positions that should be black and white, then capitulate. Always.
3
Surely I'm not the only one who sees that the GOP is under Trump's thumb. Hasn't he already openly threatened to take VP Pence and the entire GOP Down with him if he has to go so they have not much choice if they want to continue as a "party" at all.
3
This country shouldn't need a senator of "conscience". It NEEDS a senate of men and women who are willing to do the right thing for the republic and what has taken countless years and lives to create. Trump may well be acquitted by the Senate, but a trial of deceit and deficiency will make a mockery of our system. It will only serve to damage the GOP beyond redemption and give the president an acquittal that will not exonerate him.
6
What does it say about the state of the GOP (especially in the august body of the Senate) that Murkowski's merely wanting to fairly review the evidence in the president's trial (a president, by the way, who in my opinion is manifestly guilty!) has to be regarded as "exemplary", by the rest of us?
(sigh)
12
To expect the GOP and their senators to do the right thing is a delusion, not a hope.
7
Mitch has 53 votes. He needs only 51. He can release Murkowski and Collins and still win, while making them look as though they actually have a conscience. And then Trump's Interior and EPA can continue to allow the mining and logging interests to strip Alaska of its resources.
13
The problem is not with McConnell but with the archaic US constitution that’s ill-fit for modern times. No body in the senate or the house is impartial.
But if they at least attempt to have a “fair” trial with witnesses, the public might see through the fog of Trump’s tweets and Fox news’ blatant propaganda to have a positive influence on the outcome.
8
Well written and I agree with the writer’s logic and the description of the situation except this.
Rather than “a Republican Party so cowed by this president,” I would argue that “a Republican Party so cowed by a big section of American voters who see Trump as the realization of themselves” continues to support Trump. The issue must be redefined as the degrading quality of American democracy that reflect the quality of voters.
7
But will they ? I think not .Power has a very strong lure and most men will forgo whatever gets them there . A sad commentary for our fellow humans . They will defend him because it behooves them ; I wonder if they signed in blood ? It is only later , when the devil gets his due , paid with the undoing of a country and their souls .
3
To uphold its good name and reassure the American people of its fairness and good judgment, the Senate must afford the President the same unbiased treatment that the House afforded the President. I'm sure we can all agree on that.
4
McConnell is just more honest about being partisan than the Dems. And Pelosi doesn’t control the Senate. The Dems should have gone to court to demand witnesses to appear. And now the Senate should complete the work. Why? If nothing new surfaces, then impeachment fails. If something new surfaces, then the Senate can reckon with the new evidence and take a vote. Hopefully, Murkowski’s POV will catch on.
3
Most of the procedures are set. There are existing rules and the Chief Justice will interpre the rest. And the Chief Justice is not on their side -- he's not a Trump guy.
There are some unsettled matters. In 1998, Daschle and Lott agreed on how the unsettled stuff would be resolved. Schumer and McConnell should be able to agree upon the basics. The rest will probably be left to McConnell. He'll try to help Trump with the leftovers. It will make a difference but not much.
Trump isn't going to put on a defense regardless. And the case against him Trump will into evidence. It is not clear how important the disputed stuff is. But it's clear it won't matter much. One more time we're calling flagrant fouls over tick tacky stuff. This is a big to do over not much. Mostly nonsense. Democrats and Republicans screaming over a fly or two.
1
We’ve heard this song and dance from Murkowski before. But she doesn’t really mean it nor is she serious. Turns right around with her Republican pals.
4
@MIMA She did not vote for Kavanaugh. Give credit where credit is due.
3
Tragically, the fight between Republicans and Democrats will not end whether Trump is impeached or not or is re-elected or not. McConnell and his minions are Republicans in name only. To openly defy their oath of office to defend the totally incompetent Trump gives proof of a very angry self-righteous tribe that wants to end liberal democracy.
6
The media needs to stop repeating ( like a broken record) that Senate acquittal is guarantee .
Senator Murkowski is providing some spine and leadership that will lead the Senate trial so it will not be a clown show like the House republicans provided in their non defense of Trump. The Senators and the public will hear the facts and then they will vote for history and their future election results .
The talking heads say the Senate R's will acquit and I really think they are juvenile and are dismissing the oath and duty of all Senators. Darn it this is serious when our nations future is at stake. The impeachment inquiry was based on sworn testimony by dedicated public servants under oath who defied Trump's orders not to testify.
The Senators must explain why State Department foreign policy is being run by a couple of Russians named Igor and Lev, and where that money is coming from. Explain to me why Trump has taken no actions against Russian meddling in our elections in either 2016 or 2020. Explain his kowtowing to Putin at Helsinki. Explain to me how asking a foreign country for "dirt" on a political opponent or he holds up aid approved by Congress is not in violation of his oath of office. Explain to us all how any of this is upholding his oath of office to protect the US Constitution and faithfully execute our laws.
The American public has to be told the truth.
Senators must abide by their oath or are they going to continue to support The Con Man in Chief.
9
Perhaps this is the beginning of the end of Lisa Murkowski's political career, I think many Republican voters will be very angry at her for not protecting the wannabe dictator in the White House. She is actually acting like she wants to follow the democratic process which is now a no--no for loyal Trump supporters. In any case, she appears to be the unusual Republican with a spine. Maybe someone like Mitt Romney will find the courage to join her in this effort against a rubber stamp Senate regardless of what the right wing populists in Utah think. Putting country over party may now seem like a foolish thing to do for Republicans since they accustomed to put party over country but it is how our system of government is supposed to work. As we now know from experience it cannot work any other way.
5
I hope there are Republicans with scraps of morality and decency. But I’m not holding my breath.
5
“And this week, a thin crack in conference unity appeared.”
You may have mistaken a thin crack in unity for a thin crack of a smile from
McConnell seeing that one of the only likely defectors has come forward.
1
It will not be long before the Right Wing echo chamber will be declaring impeachment of Trump is a war on religion. McConnell does not see his job as a commitment to our Democratic institutions. He is ignoring his duty under the Constitution. Wake up Kentucky. Wake up America's 90%. You will not like the country Trump and McConnell are foisting on us.
3
And of course Bill Barr will not bother to investigate the financial shady dealings of McConnell and his Cabinet-level wife. Regrettably, senators cannot be impeached, only expelled (by their colleagues). But Cabinet secretaries can.
4
I would say that Lisa Murkowski is betraying the Republican Party and President Trump. This is not the first time. She was the only one in her party to vote against Brett Kavanaugh. This speaks more about her than it does the Republicans. She is a traitor and a Republican in name only. Maybe she should become a Democrat.
3
As long as the stock market stays up, GOP Senators (including The grim reaper) will toe the trump line to make their donors happy. The only other people they care to make happy are trump's base who hate anything not white and everything with a (D). Money and hate about covers it.
2
If she doesn't publicly demand that all witnesses be called, it means nothing!
1
Fear is the operative emotion for the Republican Party. The Party has spent decades grooming fear among its voting supporters as taking people’s guns and being overrun by brown and black people and homosexuals and socialists and … has been promoted. The Party leaders – Representatives and Senators – have no courage to end the fake emphasis as they fear the voters. The GOP could tell the NRA that they will work with the Democrats and pass gun control legislation. But, they fear the repercussions from those voters who fear their guns might be taken. And now, with impeachment these same leaders fear the Trump voters. Their fear is so all consuming (like someone on drugs who will do anything to support the habit) that tragically support of the Constitution is less important. These no courage Republican senators are being run by their fears. It can’t get much worse for our nation where there are no heroes. Or can Senator Murkowski awakened her Party?
2
She’s doing her job! Can I get free positive press for doing mine? The reason her actions warrant the press is that she is surrounded by Individuals incapable of putting their country first. SAD
5
We won’t be able to get rid of many Republican senators next year. But we can get rid of a few.
Susan Collins of Maine: I’m looking squarely at you.
5
@Will. Tillis, Gardner, and McSally might be voted out along with her.
1
That is really ‘rich’ that you say this after what happened in the house. Clearly a one sided affair. Some reflection on your own actions are in order.
1
One rep senator is a “Stirring of Conscience”? That’s a laugh. As though there is hope that the senate trial will even be remotely fair. Congratulations on a nice job writing this piece.
2
Who cares what they SAY? It’s what they DO that matters, and so far every single Republican who says they are disturbed or troubled by Trump’s abuses has voted to enable the very abuses that they say they’re disturbed or troubled by.
3
Don't hold your breath waiting for Murkowski to do the right thing. She votes with Trump 74% of the time.
5
As much as you dislike, this is not anything different from what was done during the Clinton impeachment trial. I opposed that attempt to remove a President based on flimsy reasoning. The same applies this time too. Unlike what Trump claims, it was not a perfect call. However, what he did was well within the President's power. You can second guess his motives or how he should have phrased it in the politically correct way. Keep in mind, he came to power by ripping apart political correctness. A lot of pundits, press and Washington bureaucrats and politicians think it should have been done differently or should not have been done at all. Well, none of you got elected in 2016. Only one person did. He gets to make those decisions, not you. Maybe you all need a primer in democracy
3
While you may have given him the power to do as he did by your vote, you could not confer upon him the authority to enlist foreign interference in a US election. No voter can do that.
6
Country and Constitution over party, the republicans have chosen trump and party, but I believe the tide will turn.
Facts are facts. The Supreme Court will uphold that Bolton, McGahn, Mulvaney and others will have to testify in the Senate trial.
6
Why would Republican senators care about Trump trying to steal 2020 when the whole Republican strategy for 2020 is cheating using voter suppression, gerrymandering, and blocking all efforts to secure the voting machines and election from outside interference?
7
The fact of the matter is, this isn’t why the good guys lost in 2016, and it’s not why we might lose again in 2020.
The fact is that gerrymandering and so on are bad, and wrong, but they’re not determinative.
WE contributed as much as even the lousiest state legislator. We didn’t show up; we voted for Jill Stein. We voted for Bernie anyway because why not? We screamed about Hillary without bothering to look at her history and what she stood for, good as well as bad.
We didn’t listen to white guys and other guys who were scared about their job and feeding their kids. We ignored our own bigotries; we yelled at the Murkowsis. We sneered at Obama and Joe Biden because we figured, hey, all they hadda do is be tough and stomp around like children.
Oh, and we demanded this, that and the other thing without bothering to find out what they were, what they’d cost, and if anybody else wanted that stuff too.
And we may just be doing it again; not to worry, we can always blame the media and the DNC.
Briefly, we suppressed ourselves very nicely indeed.
1
Maybe it’s because I’m an old woman with no job to keep, but I am continually flabbergasted and disappointed that so many of our elected officials seem to be more interested in keeping their jobs than their oaths of office.
Senators, your families aren’t going to starve if you no longer serve in the Senate. (Your ego may, but that’s something I can’t address.). You will be able to work productively, perhaps serving the people you currently represent in different ways.
Please hark back to your oath, and remember what swearing something that profound actually means.
74
I am a constituent of Lisa Murkowski and proud of her commitment to the process and not the outcome.
22
One person can make the Republicans think about the consequences of not really having a trial but just a mock trial. These are just temps in office, what goes around comes around. The House had to do these behind close doors otherwise the GOP Henchman with their "mob like intimidation" would try to publicly humiliate the whistle blower. Whistle blowers are never patted on the back for doing the right thing. We are watching and jotting down how many rules and laws we will create after these temps, both in our WH and in our Congress are out on their laurels.
6
I won’t never suggest Senator Murkowski would sell her vote, but she is looking for the highest bid.
9
As much as I am for a fair process.......does it not seem practical to revisit the process for removal from office, given that the what rules there are were written before the invention of TV?
One set of hearings ought to be sufficient, surely?
Though I do get that the Senators ought to be known to have witnessed those hearings.
In future, maybe joint sittings of the House and Senate, with a vote?
3
what you are suggesting requires a constitutional amendment. the House decides if there is enough evidence to impeach, then the Senate holds a trial. This cannot be combined.
2
@marcus
Indeed, I am going a step further and saying the constitutional amendment is necessary. The PROCESS, as it stands, is defunct because of TV.
Having a vote is sufficient.
The reason the GOP Senators are acting like party loyalists BEFORE the trial is because TV exists...and hearings have already been broadcast.
1
The second last time I recall seeing Mitt Romney’s name in the news, he was making a rather strong statement against one of trump’s more egregious assaults on American democracy (there have been so many that I can’t remember which).
The last time I recall seeing his name in the news was his attendance at a White House lunch meeting with several other senators.
Since then, not a peep.
It would be really interesting to know what was discussed at that lunch meeting, which as far as I remember was never revealed. One can only suspect that it involved a none-too-subtle threat against any who dare to speak out against Dear Leader.
13
She's the token Republican who is allowed to protest, to make non-Republicans think they're 98% in lockstep instead of 100%. Whatever concerns she has will have no effect.
18
It evidently takes great courage, and is a tremendous personal risk for Senator Murkowski to express even this mild expression of concern about the proceedings.
I suspect that historians, social scientists, political scientists, psychologists and psychiatrists will likely be engaged for decades trying to understand what happened to the former GOP, and how the Trump achieved such dictatorial control of it.
14
It evidently takes great courage, and is a tremendous personal risk for Senator Murkowski to express even this mild expression of concern about the proceedings.
I suspect that historians, social scientists, political scientists, psychologists and psychiatrists will likely be engaged for decades trying to understand what happened to the former GOP, and how the Trump achieved such dictatorial control of it.
5
It will be the same travesty in the Senate that it was in the House, but will arrive at an opposite conclusion and outcome. That is, if Pelosi ever sees fit to send the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. At the end of the day, Murkowski will vote to acquit with the other GOP senators assuming she still wants a career in politics. The fact is, Pelosi has no more control over what the Senate does than McConnell has over what the House does - Pelosi only thinks she does.
1
Stopped cold when reading that McConnel "proclaimed it the Senate's 'duty' to end what he called an assault on norms and precedent."
Before the election Trump declared he would release his taxes. The moment subsequent to being sworn into office, a future appointee was in the audience calling Russia. A couple of days later his communications director was told to proclaim to all that Trump's crowd was the largest ever.
The movement of "norms" began immediately. Certainly this past week regarding the Navy reflects a new presidential involvement in a spot rather revered, and moving back a bit the newly adopted role of the Attorney General is alarming.
Should one have a list of the many norms adjusted over these years, the question becomes one of what will be the cumulative effects? Individually it is one thing, together it becomes something not to ignore!
22
The impeachment process is over. It has served its purpose and Donald Trump has received a much-deserved spanking. If I were Nancy Pelosi, I would ring in the New Year by announcing that she will forward the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate some time after the election on November 3. Until then the House will dedicate itself to producing bills to add to the pile of bills gathering dust on do-nothing Mitch McConnell's desk.
44
What Murkowski is saying is her party maybe should keep their violation of their oaths of office a little less obvious.
27
Might be nice if it was really true. But, we’ve seen this movie before! When the ball really gets rolling they talk like a choir!!! You saw the Kavanaugh hearings, and other instances. You’ll see even Romney come out with a stunning partisan summon.
You saw the so called “moderate” congressman in the House, from California, I forget the name.
When push came to shove, his conscience ran through the window like a bird. They’re probably working her right now! Extra funding for her re-election, more pork via Mrs. McConnell, for pet-projects etc etc.
You might want to bet she will, in fact, come out with the most vociferous defense speech for Trump!!
7
The Republican leadership is totally complicit in Trump's betrayal of this nation. They are joined in the rejection of the Constitution by William Barr. Our democracy is now under its greatest threat in history. The Republican Party has abandoned the Constitution and the American people as they pursue a strategy reminiscent of the rise of fascism in the 1930's. Trump is their mascot and the symbol of their treasonous hypocrisy.
The only way that justice can possibly be done is if Americans go the polls in massive numbers, great enough to overcome Republican voter suppression and Russian election interference. We must cleanse our government of Trump, McConnell and all of their feckless Republican lackeys in Congress. The alternative is an endless descent into the Trumpian abyss and an end to our democracy.
56
Liberals, don't get too excited about this. It's not the start of some crumbling of Republican solidarity.
Lisa Murkowski is a closet Democrat. She just runs as a Republican to get elected in Alaska.
She never endorsed Donald Trump as the Republican candidate in 2016, nor did she support him.
She voted against Kavanaugh for Supreme Court.
She voted against a ban on taxpayer funded abortions.
…
This is just another manifestation of her true character.
7
@Raz Indeed. It shows she has some character, unlike the overwhelming majority of the GOP.
23
@Lifelong New Yorker
Whatever...you missed the point.
This doesn't foreshadow things to come, but simply the predictable and precedented actions of one individual.
2
@Lifelong New Yorker
Whatever...you missed my point.
This is the predictable and precedented act of a single individual, not the beginning of some mass abandonment of the President by the Republicans.
The Democrats have had one goal since Donald Trump was elected, to undermine his Presidency, not to serve the nation.
1
gah! don't they see this for what it is? it's a ploy. McConnell announces his allegiance to Trump to keep the trumpers happy and avoid any backlash come primary season. he orchestrates a feint wherein a few senators from "moderate" districts gesture at neutrality, knowing full well that when push comes to shove, they'll back Trump. it's a win win and the nytimes plays right into their hands. save your praise for a vote to convict.
6
Guaranteed that Murkowski will soon say that she will vote not to convict Trump, and follow the other sheep, along with Jones of Alabama.
11
Let’s call it a cynical bid for publicity until there is an actual decision. We are three years into the reign of this charlatan and the republicans are still afraid of him.
12
"“Why should Crazy Nancy Pelosi, just because she has a slight majority in the House, be allowed to Impeach the President of the United States?”
Why should crazy Donald Trump, just because he has a tiny majority of votes in 3 states, be allowed to be President of the United States instead of the person whom the voters preferred by over 3 million votes?
99
Lynn. Electoral College
1
By party loyalty do you mean like what happened in the House?
4
@M The House majority was achieved by its members clearly stating that they intended to bring the president to account for his behavior: totally different from the Senate's position--protect the party against any (lawful) challenge.
5
Alaskans have been watching their State Burn and Melt, conservation methods long approved are being ignored. The Trump environmental steamroller isn’t that popular. Murkowski got in on a write in vote, not Republican Party approval. Maybe she has something the emasculated Republican men don’t have.
13
She said she is "disturbed". I'm disturbed when the neighbor turns the radio on too loud. Disturbed? And everyone is lauding her bravery. How about being a little more than "disturbed"? Still spineless rhetoric.
34
Please stop falling for this nonsense. None of these people in the GOP have a "conscience" to be "stirred". This is all to make it look like they are independent for their constituents, so they have cover when they vote the party line. Please stop giving them undo attention. It's what they want, and they have FOX to promote their propaganda.
14
First of all, I don't think Murkowski will go beyond being "disturbed." As for others following, when pigs fly.
21
So the Times wants Republicans to consider doing the right thing, but they do not want the same from the Democrats? What a surprise. Every Democrat in the Senate voted not guilty when Clinton had been impeached.
The press talks about backwards societies and their tribalism, but they fail to recognize just how strong the same impulses are in US politics. Fortunately, he will not be convicted in the Senate, and it will be up to the voters to decide if he should remain in office for another four years or not.
4
@luxembourg Two very different cases, twenty years apart. Regardless of what happened in 1998 -- which is irrelevant, anyway -- wouldn't anyone with any sense of morality want the Republicans to do the right thing in this case? Not you?
1
@luxembourg You neglect to mention that five Republican senators also felt that lying about sex was not an impeachable offense. Actually had Clinton been removed from office, Gore would have won the 2000 election. The last thing the Republicans wanted was to remove Clinton from office. They knew that Gore would be hurt but only if Clinton remained in office.
3
But some voted to impeach in the House. And none supported a phony trial, or announced that they were coordinating with the White House.
False equivalency is a useful tactic, except it’s, you know, false.
3
Sigh. Cynical me says we've already BTDT with Murkowski, Collins and Flake pretending they weren't sure they wanted Kavanaugh confirmed.
4
You're dreaming. She's just trying to give the impression that she's fair-minded. In the end she'll vote to acquit.
9
Talk is cheap. The Senator's tepid comments should definitely not be taken as some sort of sign of conscience or courage. She is a Senate Republican. I repeat, a Senate Republican. She will vote, when it counts, with her fellow Republicans. I dare her to prove me wrong.
6
She’s upset that Mitch blew the Republicans true intentions. And she will choose party over her Constitutional duty without blinking an eye. What a sorry state of affairs this country is in when the minority is running/ruining it.
8
Republicans have appeared to have a monopoly on deciding who is being partisan. How is it that a lockstep defense of someone with a pretty bad track record is not partisan, while an impeachment based on documentation and testimony is a partisan witch hunt?
1069
@rdb1957
The best piece of evidence was provided by trump himself. he confessed! and claimed it proved him innocent.
68
@rdb1957 This is a partisan impeachment. That was made crystal clear by the House vote when zero Republicans voted for impeachment. As to" documentation" and testimony" opinions differ and that is why trials exist. Frankly I believe both the House and Senate versions will be shown to be unfair and partisan. It is political and partisan and obvious to anyone with eyes and ears.
1
@rdb1957 How? Because "the feeling is the fact."
11
"This week, a thin crack in conference unity appeared." A very thin crack indeed, but enough that I'll hold onto my last, tiny sliver of hope that some Republican senators will take their oaths of office seriously.
7
I can't help but feel sadness that the NY Times editorial board is taken in by these Republican ploys. Watch Sen. Murkowski in the end. There is no doubt that her vote will be fully aligned with the Republican party. She is simply inoculating herself against charges of bias back home. With that done --- it's then back to business: full-throated support for Trump. Sen Collins of Maine, of course, is a far better actress than Sen. Murkowski. Collins is famous for her roles in publicly agonizing over her political decision-making before inevitably turning to vote with Trump. She's priceless.
25
The statement: "Now they want fairness in the Senate"
The message: "The GOP doesn't do 'fairness'"
13
At least three Democratic congressmen, Representatives Jared Golden of Maine, Collin C. Peterson of Minnesota and Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey want the Trump impeachment trial to be more than a test of party loyalty. Others should follow.
1
Actually, not true.
@Robert Political tactics or the search for truth are in the eyes of the beholder.
1
@Independent
Drew is GOP.
It’s all politics. Not one element of every issue either party has raised against a person in politics is in fact anything else but politics! Some get caught, some don’t. Trumps problem is ppl don’t like him in larger numbers than other politicians. And the term ‘dislike’ doesn’t give their feeling any justice. Sad but true. Mostly because he’s not a politician, he’s a political figure (now) and doesn’t play the game well (at all, and by his own design), therefore he’s called out. What Trump has done IS NO DIFFERENT than any former President, just less savvy to playing the game, careless and carefree about any consequences and therefore gets the backlash (leakers, harsh complainers and massive disdain and dislike-full time). It does however fire up his base, and he knows it, so, even though he complains, he’s pretty much okay with it all. He knows he’ll be re-elected again because unhappy bullies and talkers and complainers who aren’t authentic and who think any of this isn’t just politics normally don’t get their way anyway. Normally.
Whether you like Trump or not, he’s authentic and the only one out there right now who is.
3
Murkowski's "expression of concern sets her apart."
This editorial is grasping at straws, fumbling for a fix!
In Alaska, where Murkowski resides, water is power. Yes, it's true that small glacial leaks can lead to giant cracks (especially these days). But does anything Republican even remotely resemble nature?
Nope.
3
Voters need to remember: Republicans are NOT Americans. As a party they are actively working to undermine the constitution of the United States. If they succeed, none of us will recognize our country. Our Christian brethren are deluded if they think they will be exempt from that reformation.
6
Murkowski being "disturbed" will have about the same consequence as Romney being "concerned" and maybe Susan Collins mumbling that she's "somewhat puzzled".
14
No such similar stirring of conscience from my Senator Collins. Which is why I will never vote for her again.
6
@Raymond Durkee
I sure hope that's a bellwether from the great state of Maine.
If the Republicans plan on existing as a viable party (post-Trump) the will need to step up to the reality of what this President really represents - the rise of Fascism in American.
The "Trumpian necon, America first," idealism is frighteningly similar to the German-American, Isolationist movement that the United States briefly experianced in the 1930's is now an all to real threat to Democracy.
This nation needs real leadership (hopefully from within the Republican party) that will step up and signal that moral courage has returned to politics.
1
@pixelperson
Fascism doesn't simply go away if it's defeated at the ballot box. As seen over the past few months, Fascism-Lite, what we now have, essentially, with the rigid consensus of agreement and hysteria among the republican party is a crypto-Fascist movement that feeds off itself. In other words, it fuels it's rise to power, then all it needs to do is maintain that power. The cries of "you hate" and "he did nothing wrong" and "you've wanted....since election day..." in the face of facts to the contrary are little more than attempts to maintain that power and emerge from the situation intact and politically viable. Fascists will lie when they need to lie and insist they have the truth.
Alaska is reliably Red. If Murkowski utters a peep on the Senate floor, they'll replace her with a real Republican.
4
The world has surmised that the grand old party is suspect because of supporting Trump - blind to civility and traditional American an values - and the price for this malfeasance is looming. The senator from Alaska realizes this but do you think, Mitch, the man you claim is so intelligent has a clue or even morally piqued about any of this?
1
It’s a sign of the dire straits the country is in when Sen. Murkowski’s tepid claim to be “disturbed” by McConnell’s pledge to coordinate with the president’s legal team is viewed as sufficiently noteworthy to merits its own NYT editorial. Where’s the outrage from the rest of the GOP, not just at McConnell’s latest transparent gambit to protect his party, but at every shameful, deceitful, and downright un-American act that this President commits? So long as the GOP continues to say nothing, there’s very little hope for the republic as we know it. Sen. Murkowski’s pitiful demurral should be seen for what it is – a very, very little cry into a gale force wind. We need a whole lot more from a lot more Republican senators.
6
Donald Trump has made a career out of selling loyalty to the Trump brand. So the way to beat Donald Trump is not to buy what he's selling; convincing enough people in 2020 to decide not to buy his product and he goes out of business.
Of course, in the good old days, a competitor would start a rumor that your product was worthless, people would stop buying what your selling and your product would, in fact, become worthless.
The problem is; some people will never be convinced not to buy overpriced loyalty.
1
One of these days they'll have all this behind them.
But they'll still have to live with it.
2
Trump is the greatest threat to America democracy imo since the Civil War.
Sen Murkowski reminds me of Sen.
Andrew Johnson of Tenn. during the Civil War who was the only southern rebel state senator to not boycott Congress.
Granted Sen. Johnson was not exactly a total role model and today would be condemned for other views but nevertheless stood out like Sen. Murkowski.
PS: Kudos to other patriots like Sens. Corker and Flake who stood up to Flake and also the late Sen. McCain.
1
It is 100% certain that the Senate will acquit the president of the charges in the articles of impeachment. The question is; Will these corrupt jurors allow the American public see the evidence that would shame them all and the president as well?
It is 100% certain they will not.
They will not request White House testimony and documents, in the most relevant impeachment process in U.S. history.
Trump was trying to steal the 2020 election and the U.S. Senate is now complicit in that crime as well.
3
A "stirring of the conscience of the senate" is like a twitch in the eye of a corrupt car salesman that is a juror for another.
It is NOTHING, apples and oranges compared to Clinton's impeachment where they ran a minor financial investigation into the ground and came up with a lie about Clinton's love life.
The differences are first the magnitude of the crimes and corruption. Trump several orders of magnitude worse, affecting the country and the world. Secondly, Clinton testified and did not use executive orders to block anybody from testifying. Last and definitely not least, the Democrats treated Clinton's little love lies very seriously even as it was pure partisan manure and a true witch hunt into his finances about a $100,000 dollar profit where they found no evidence of wrongdoing. Trump made 60 million on a 40 million dollar mansion sold to a Russian oligarch in one year, not investigated.
Bottom line; Trump's crimes,lies, and corruption are real,copious and serious, not a partisan issue. Republicans would need the cardiac arrest paddles to revive them from being willfully dead on morals, ethics, the law and America. An eye-twitch is just not enough for them to be considered anything but Trump loving false patriots that don't stand up for America itself.
5
Murkowski's act (along with Susan Collins') ihas become very tiresome. She repeatedly calls attention to herself to inflate her supposed importance as an independent and reasonable voice but, when the vote is on the line, she invariably falls in line with all the Trump Toadies.
9
The House refused to allow Trump's lawyers to call witnesses and to cross examine the democrat house's witnesses.Since when does an accused not allowed to defend himself?
1
@Molly
IN GRAND JURY PROCEEDINGS, THOSE UNDER THREAT OF INDICTMENT ARE NEVERE ALLOWED TO PARTICIPATE OR CALL OR CROSS-EXAMINE WITNESSES. It's not a tribunal, it's an investigation.
THIS WILL GO TO TRIAL IN THE SENATE. YOU UNDERSTAND _T_R_I_A_L, RIGHT? THAT IS WHERE THE INDICTED ONE GETS TO FORMULATE THEIR DEFENSE, AND CALL AND CROSS EXAMINE WITNESSES. AND NOW THE SENATE, WHO KNOWS THAT, AND THE PRESIDENT DO NOT WANT WITNESSES. WHY? BECAUSE THEY KNOW THEY'LL LOSE.
5
@Molly
Matty is correct but forgot to add that the House did invite Trump or his lawyers to come and introduce any evidence they wanted to. They refused and still claimed it was unfair.
2
@Molly
Before the grand jury- in this case the House.
He can defend himself during his trial, in the senate.
(& I do seem to remember the repub congressmen cross examining house witnesses)
2
Look. We all know how this will play out. There are ZERO Republicans who will vote to convict/remove Trump. This talk of 'due process' is just window dressing. Unless Republicans pay a heavy political price, in 2020, don't expect a change in behavior.
It's up to 'We The People' to hold Trump accountable for his lies and Republicans for their mendacity.
2
It turns out that the republican party doesn’t benefit from a democracy at all.
2
I could almost understand it if Republican senators had high regard for Trump and chalked up his conversation with Zelensky and his stonewalling congressional subpoenas to his total ignorance of the Constitution and presidential powers, but the senators who will provide cover for Trump have nothing but disdain for his immorality, so appropriately identified by the Christianity Today editorial. They have their "paisan" Pence waiting in the wings. So why protect Trump? Trump's legacy of corruption is already sealed. If Murkowski winds up being the lone maverick of the GOP, what does it say about their legacy?
2
She is troubled. Collins will be concerned. Romney will express dismay. Nothing will change. All politics is Sandy Hook now.
13
everyone work on a campaign; write post cards; send texts; make calls; give money; knock on doors; wrote letters to the editor; inundate Facebook; and keep it simple; trump gets in you lose your health care- period.
1
This is too much being made of too little. She can fret her hour on this stage and in the end still stick with the party which tried to stick it to her; recall that she lost in her primary and won as an independent. We should not be astounded that any Senator should speak the truth; that they took an oath and should honor it, but sill, good for her. Is she a lamb in with wolves or at the end of the day somewhat sheepish but still a Trump wolf. Justice Kavanaugh probably thinks so, as her vote helped him.
2
Thank you, Senator Murkowski, for having enough integrity to call attention to the alarming intentions of Mr. McConnell. Our public servants are supposed to be looking out for the well being of our nation. For him to state publicly that he is working hand in glove with the accused in a trial, where his duty is to serve as an impartial juror, is basically to thumb his nose at the Constitution and admit to treason. Bolton, Mulvaney, et al, should be made to testify. If Trump is innocent, he would be exonerated. What are the Republicans afraid of? If only three more Senators will have enough integrity to demand a real trial, instead of a sham trial, perhaps we can get to the truth.
4
To all of those posters who are questioning Murkowski's integrity: she was one of only three Republican senators to vote to save Obamacare and the only Republican who voted against the Kavanaugh nomination. There was enormous pressure for her to vote with her party, but she voted her conscience.
Give her a little credit.
13
Congressional Republicans have shown time and again that they will put party over country, even if our nation’s national security is at risk. It is highly unlikely that there will be any profiles in courage in the Senate trial in what is now the party of service to Trump. This is a sad state of affairs for our democracy.
3
It will be interesting to see if Senator Murkowski moves beyond this statement--- which in the grand scheme of things is weak and only appears brave given the state of today's Senate Republicans. Let's hope that she stands up to fight meaningfully for a fair trial, to vote with conscience not strictly for party, and encourages others to do the same. We have seen her back down before.
4
@JC If she is really that "disturbed", why doesn't she stand up in the Senate and give a serious, passionate speech urging her colleagues to reconsider what they're doing or risk sending this country to hell? I'll have a lot more respect for her if she does that. Feeble complaints in the press are easy.
6
There seems to be this continuing intent by the Editors to try and shame the Republicans in the Senate to do their sworn duty. But the certain reality is that this will not happen. Indeed, I would fully expect Murkowski herself to ultimately vote to acquit Donald Trump and the party leaders lean on her.
The fact remains that the Republicans have fallen lock, stock and barrel into the clutches of Trump. They will remain beholden to him and his "base" in order to ensure their own political survival.
The days when an oath of office, one that includes the commitment to uphold and defend the US constitution, is really quite meaningless.
Much like ancient Rome, the American republic has now become an empire -- one under the control of an emperor such that the Senate is simply window dressing to provide simply the appearance of lawful government.
16
@George I share your fears about the future of our country and the world but if we can get out the vote as we did in 2018 and as we did last month in Copake and other parts of Columbia County across the country we can put an end to the Trumpian reign and turn the ship around. GOTV
5
@George
This is the role that major newspapers have taken in our society
3
No one should not trust Senator Murkowski any more than they should trust Senator McConnell (for the reasons you so artfully stated). Senator Murkowski is the same person who, in the summer of 2018, said that more oil development in the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge will result in no adverse environmental impacts. That argument is disingenuous on several levels, but especially when she made no mention of the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill (evidence of which can still be found 30 years later). And in further evidence of her lack of trustworthiness, if not outright deceit, is her “Present” vote in the Kavanaugh confirmation. She talks a good line on the impeachment process, but Democrats should not read much if anything into this. Nor should the Editorial Board.
16
@Huge Grizzly Sen. Murkowski has shown that she has a strong sense of integrity and independence on issues including health care and judicial appointments.
While I do not agree with her votes and policy on oil development, I realize that the policy she supports IS supported by the vast majority of the constituents she represents in Alaska.
She has earned my respect.
5
@MBR While I respect your opinion, Sen. Murkowski has not earned my respect. In my view, at the end of the day, like so many other GOP members, Senator Murkowski is a coward.
A lot of smoke and mirrors. Nothing will come of this. No one on any side will change their minds or votes. Pelosi is acting as if she's really accomplishing something. Well, she made some headlines and probably gained stronger support for her next election. I guess that's what she was interested in all along.
4
Faux conscience and no conscience are the same thing. In the end, they will feign some magical level of satisfaction that this will be a fair proceeding and then get right behind the donald.
15
"At least one Republican, Lisa Murkowski, wants the Trump impeachment trial to be more than a test of party loyalty. Others should follow."
Because the impeachment process in the house had NOTHING to do with impartiality or party lines.
5
@bored critic it had everything to do with sworn testimony or, as most of us understand the term, the truth.
5
@bored critic - And neither did Clinton's!
1
I assume this is just political calculus - Republicans have sold their souls by this point - this is a transparent maneuver by Murkowski to pretend that she has a conscience.
23
@AM
She was the only Republican senator to vote against Kavanaugh, so I think there's a chance her concern is genuine. Not that I'm betting!
1
@AM
I guess the folks back in AK are still naive enough to buy the ploy.
I heard brilliant analysis today in which Trump's refusal to allow his people to testify was compared with a perpetrator's attempt to prevent testimony by kidnapping or killing witnesses. In either case it is illegal to suppress testimony because the criminal cannot benefit at trial from his own criminal actions.
32
@Beth A trial of impeachment is not a criminal proceeding.
3
@KT Very authentic, he has no qualms revealing deplorable personality traits and attitudes in his public behavior. Another guy I find very authentic, Mitch McConnell, stated publicly he would ignore his oath and simply do whatever the administration tells him to do instead of running a fair trial.
Mitch, if you can disprove the facts in the impeachment articles, why wouldn’t you? Why would you tolerate the inevitable stain on your record, and that of serving Republican Senators, by ignoring yet another duty to the country you are sworn to serve. Is it just that you know you can not be viewed any worse than you already are, by a Majority of the American Public? Do you really just not care about reputation anymore, knowing that your career will soon be over? I would possibly feel some compassion were it not for the gleeful delight you take in taking down our country, one subverted or ignored tradition at a time.
Isn’t that the reason we have the Obstruction of Justice charge? And isn’t that why Mueller could go no further than the report, as that charge is a criminal one, and the Pres supposedly cannot be indicted while in office? So if you are going to try a President in office, it has to be a political trial, not a criminal one. And Impeachment has everything to do with immorality unbecoming our leader, like lying under oath - though if the lie is to protect an innocent’s honor as I believe was Bills motive, it might be justified to not remove him. Still, that trial went forward. Now that we know Mitch and crew have NO honor or respect for their oaths, it seems nonsensical that they would even consider any morality test of our leader, including obstruction, that an actual trial would provide. They may have no honor, but they sure don’t want to be branded as hypocrites!
1
Here it is - the litmus test - which Senators will be honor their oath
20
@JLH/MSH
I'm not holding my breath.
1
@JLH/MSH
How many Dem senators are there? Take that number, subtract one or two, and there's your answer.
2
Our total dislike of Trump has blinded us. We might win the battle but lose the war. Trump was wrong but most folks don't think months from the election it warrants giving Trump his walking papers. The Senate has the upper hand in this and no matter how Schumer whines McConnell is holding a pat hand. Lets get this over and keep it moving.
3
@Steven McCain
YOu are off course. This has nothing to do with liking or disliking the president.
He committed several crimes. The ones he is charged with here involve him corrupting our elections by bribing a foreign government. Isn't that the same thing he was investigated for for the last 3 years? I wonder does Mueller now regret not issuing a subpoena for him to appear and answer questions? I doubt it he got the result he got because he is a republican not because he could not find and prove a crime. He chose not to find the crimes he should have charged Trump with.
2
@Steven McCain
Debbie Downer! No faith in your fellow Americans!
1
Murkowski's "disturbed" + Collins "concerned" + (Romney + Alexander) targeted by "Republicans for the Rule of Law." Four times nothing is still nothing.
They talk the talk, but will not walk the walk to remove Trump.
I was alive during the Cold War, and so were much of the Senate. All of my life Russia was our adversary. How is it suddenly okay to be on Russia's side?
179
@Just Live Well
Lisa voted against repealing Obamacare. McCain got the applause because he was last but her vote meant as much as his.
5
@Just Live Well
The same way it is for us and the rest of the west to allow Germany to control the EU and Europe.
1
@Just Live Well
I was alive in WW2 when it was okay for the U.S., Russia and the UK to be allies on the same side. Of course Russia never really forgot that the U.S., the UK, Japan and serval other nations invaded it to overthrow the revolution. Oh, you didn't learn that in school? Wonder why.
2
What does my magic 8-ball say today?
Let's see.
The Senate will celebrate bipartisanship not seen in a long time, in Trump's acquittal.
At least 2 democrat senators Joe Manchin and Doug Jones are expected to cross over, unlikely though that they will pull a Van Drew move in the Senate.
The sooner the Senate acquits, the sooner Pelosi and Schiff can begin their second impeachment show.
7
The idea that Joe Manchin and Doug Jones collaborating with the Republicans makes it a “bipartisan acquittal’ is so laughable it can only have come from Trump supporters.
If and when they cross over it will be because they’re afraid of the banshees in Trump’s base.
33
Though I don’t agree with Trump’s impeachment, it wasn’t an injustice. The House has the constitutional right to do what they did. However, Nancy Pelosi not sending this to the Senate would be an injustice, because it’s like someone being charged with a crime, but not being allowed their day in court. If she doesn’t send this to the Senate, Trump should be acquitted.
6
@Mark Pelosi never said she wasn't sending the impeachment to the Senate. I'm not sure what led you to believe that, but it's not true. She's holding it up until she is assured that McConnell will live up to the oath of his office in processing the impeachment. So far, he has said that, instead of reviewing the charges and the evidence, he will be working with the White House Administration to aid in the defense of the president.
That is the *exact* opposite of what he is charged with as the leader of the Senate!
27
@Glenn Thomas
Pelosi doesn't get to tell McConnell how to do his job. If Trump is the threat to the nation she claims, then she should be sending this to the Senate without delay.
2
@Mark Correct on Pelosi doesn't get to tell McConnell how to do his job nor do you get to tell Pelosi how to do hers. The constitution does not specify a time frame for the House Speaker to send the impeachment to the senate in any way; that is, there's no exact time frame in terms of hours, days or weeks nor any other indications of how speedily they must be passed such as "as soon as possible" or "post haste," etc. She can hold the bag as long as she wants to for any reason just as you are free to whine about it.
4
Let us all hope she will step up and at the least have witness come forward then see what they have.
2
@sandpaper
When the witness comes forward and shows his (or her) cards, don't be disappointed if they have an empty hand.
1
@sandpaper
She can't have witnesses step up. It's a senate controlled trial. She had her chance for witnesses and brought who she and nadler wanted. For those who didnt appear, dems did not go to the courts to enforce their subpoenas. Because they really didn't want them to testify, they just wanted the "appearance" of wanting them so they could cry "foul" when they refused to appear but did nothing to compel or enforce them to appear. It was all a sham for appearance sake for the blind trump haters.
2
The time for talk by "disturbed" Republican senators like Lisa Murkowski is over. We've been there before with the Kavanugh hearings and know how that turned out. When at least four Republican senators like Susan Collins, Cory Gardner, Martha McSally, and Thom Tillis, who are already facing very tough re-election fights, actually say they'll vote to have a "fair" impeachment trial in the Senate that allows witness testimony by John Bolton, Mick Mulvaney and Mike Pompeo along with documents they and Donald Trump have refused to release, then I'll believe it. As it stands now, it's wishful thinking that the "grim reaper" [aka Majority Mitch McConnell] who is taking orders from the "sin tweeter" [aka defendant Donald J. Trump] will allow anything other than a fake trial that grants "Total Exoneration!" Speaker Pelosi should then consider submitting the articles of impeachment to the American people to cast their votes as jurors next November.
20
@Paul Wortman mcsally won’t dare vote against trump she saw what happened to flake.
At least three Democrats, Representatives Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Jared Golden of Maine and Collin Peterson of Minnesota want the Trump impeachment trial to be more than a test of party loyalty. Others should follow.
2
@Independent
Because the House impeachment trial was more than a test of party loyalty?
What happened to Pelosi's call that she didnt want an impeachment unless there was bi-partisan support? Oh, politics took over.
4
@Independent Then let’s have a real trial, where witnesses in the position to know the truth are required to testify. Bolton, Mulvaney, et al must tell the nation what they know. Otherwise, it is just a sham trial.
3
Correction: Van Drew is an ex-Democrat.
1
All GOP senators who speak out now may not ACTUALLY favor impeaching Trump when all is said and done. That includes Mitt Romney,Susan Collins and others who always fake purity in thought and speech but do a 360 when final votes are cast. We saw that in Brett Kavanaugh hearing and voting against sanction on Russian oligarchs. So it is all talk but no walk !
17
@HP - A small but significant navigational fact - 360 degrees is a complete circle. If you do a 360 degree turn, you are facing in the same direction you started with. To go in the exact opposite direction, you make a 180 degree turn. One can hope the senators make a 180 degree turn from the direction of their party. Sometimes miracles happen.
3
@HP
Trump is already impeached.
1
Just finished "A Warning." Anonymous gives the republican legislators and voters a pass. Yes, it is a catalog of all of Trump's outrages but little mention of the legislators who have failed to hold him accountable. Now we witness how craven Jordan, Nunes and McConnell have become.
15
Wow! One Republican! But nothing may happen in the Senate because Pelosi says that she is in charge of the Senate too, and that they have to do things her way. Many Senators disagree with her. When she didn’t allow Republicans to call witnesses in the House, she set the stage for Republicans in the Senate to decide to not call witnesses chosen by Democrats.
3
@Mark McDonald
WHAT HAPPENED IN THE HOUSE WAS AN INVESTIGATION (THE SO-CALLED "BUNKER BASEMENT SECRET ROOM" CLOSE-DOOR HEARINGS) AND THEN PUBLIC HEARINGS, PROVIDING EVIDENCE. THE SIDE OF THE BENCH THAT IS UNDER THREAT OF INDICTMENT NEVER GETS TO CALL OR QUESTION WITNESSES DURING THE INVESTIGATION.
NOW THIS IS GOING TO TRIAL. AND THE POWER THAT BE, ONE MOSCOW MITCHSKY, HAS MADE IT CLEAR THAT HE DOESN'T INTEND TO HAVE AN HONEST TRIAL. SO, YOU'RE WRONG. IT IS REPUBLICANS WHO WANT TO SWEEP THIS UNDER THE RUG, AND FAST. IT WAS DONE RIGHT IN THE HOUSE AND NOW NEEDS TO BE DONE RIGHT IN THE SENATE,OR ELSE SOMEONE NAMED McCONNELL GETS PUT UNDER A SPOTLIGHT HE'S MANAGED UNTIL NOW TO AVOID.
3
Perhaps Sen. Murkowski will read some of these comments and know that there are many many people who would love to see her remembered as the courageous soul who started the ball rolling to unseat Donald Trump.
26
I understand that by praising Murkowski, the hope is that other vain Senators will be induced into following their conscience. But the GOP is no longer a conventional political party but a radical faction hostile to the rule of law. In the GOP, there are no moderates, there are no principled statesmen, and there is no impulse to defend the constitution or the country. If Murkowski votes to convict, it’ll only be because McConnell realizes there are members of the caucus in moderate districts who must win to preserve the Republican majority. It’s crass politics and it’s a shame. I wish the Times wouldn’t give false hope to a readership that is desperate for good news.
15
@AlNewman
I agree that they're dangling false hope, but in all fairness, they've done this less often than the WaPo has. That seems to be about 1/3 of what that paper is putting out these days (he says with more than a pinch of hyperbole).
2
She will not vote to impeach Trump; she simply doesn’t like being taken for granted.
27
Murkowski has a habit of speaking out for decency and morality for the sake of optics right before caving and towing her party's line in the vote. I anticipate this will be no different.
88
May the Republicans hear and listen to the truth. That is hard to do with a president like Trump, but it is still possible.
7
Whether appearing to be in lockstep or appearing to be an outlier, it is all doublespeak and spin on the part of Republicans. They follow the same "governing" playbook as the Russians, for the same reasons, which are, if you can't win fairly, cheat, then lie continuously about it until it sets in and people give up and get used to it. Welcome to life in America in 2020.
25
In the standard order of business, several GOP members of the Senate will join Murkowski in coming weeks to seriously profess themselves "disturbed" by Trump's actions. Expect such protestations from the electorally endangered Susan Collins and Cory Gardner, along with the impregnable Utah-based Mitt Romney. Lindsay Graham will express somewhat less-vehement sentiments, after first clearing the wording with the White House. And once their words of "conscience" are on the record, nearly all of them will vote against convicting Trump in his trial.
34
Hope is eternal. So, yes, we need to hope that a number of Republican Senators, after they make their oath to serve as faithful jurors, will step forward with honor and courage.
They can look to several House Dems, who reside in purple districts, as models of appropriate congressional leadership.
5
So when anti- Trump commenters indicate that Republican politicians are not diverse enough to voice their opposition to core issues such as "Abortion" these same people are praising Senator Murkowski.
So while Speaker Pelosi and other Democrats in Congress may be negotiating with other Republican politicians to potentially walk the plank, perhaps the Speaker should be concerned that there aren't any Senate Democrats that may abandon her ship...
Murkowski will gain visibility as seeking fairness. In the end she will go along with Trump, McConnell et al. Same old, same old.
37
Trump has distorted the truth by falsely claiming there was no opportunity to defend himself in the House proceedings. The Senate process represents a safe opportunity for him to testify.
Of course his performance will be "perfect" regardless of how illogical and untruthful the testimony he presents.
5
Why isn't party loyalty enough? The president is a Republican. Isn't loyalty to the president and therefore to the Republican party sufficient proof of one's loyalty to the nation? Of course, during the time when Obama was president Republicans defined patriotism as being opposed to the president's party... Is it possible to be partisan and American? Is it possible to surrender one's conscience to the party and remain free?
5
@Max And Max
That’s quite a few questions, M&M.
I’ll take a crack at the final two.
Yes, a person can lean toward a political philosophy AND still be a loyal citizen. The rule of law, ethics and country nearly always take precedence over party.
Surrender one’s conscience AND remain free?
No. No way. Never.
The primary rule is LOYALTY ABOVE ALL ELSE, EXCEPT HONOR.
Example: Soldiers obey all orders. That is, all lawful orders. They don’t commit war crimes.
2
No
1
@Tom W
Obedience negates the need for conscience.
Conscience is the voice of democracy. We vote in secret so each one of us can vote honestly instead of voting with the crowd. The crowd always requires our obedience, which is why the crowd has no conscience. A person who votes out of party loyalty may be a member of the crowd and community, but a murderer of true democratic ethics. Democracies are ruled by each individual conscience that reasons and weighs and makes decisions on the best available information, which is never complete. That's why we can vote to reverse things. But to give up the conscience and follow the party/crowd is to break the most sacred aspect of democracy.
3
I believe she and the rest of them will be taking an oath and swearing to be impartial - we'll see.
4
@mja - And I believe is fairies, and Santa, and the Easter Bunny. I believe the rich will fight climate change. I believe that patriots exists in the GOP and that they will stand up to trump and mcconnell and do their duty. I believe in god and sweet baby jesus and reincarnation and the greatness of america. I believe that i tell a lot of lies.
1
Senator Murkowski must follow a different moral compass than does my Colorado Republican Senator Cory Gardner, who is up for re-election in 2020. He like almost all GOP legislators have demonstrated that, indeed, will not be troubled regardless of what violent crimes their leader commits. It is very sad. And infuriating. But all of us, if we are silent, share the guilt.
13
@Chac At least three Democrats, Representatives Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Jared Golden of Maine and Collin Peterson of Minnesota want the Trump impeachment trial to be more than a test of party loyalty. Others should follow.
@Independent those are house members. Their work is done. Trump was impeached. The Senate will try him. The people you name have negligible impact on the senate.
6
@Chac
Lisa's seat is safe until 2022, no doubt part of her current calculus of 'being disturbed'.
Sen. Murkowski deserves praise for questioning Mitch McConnell's highly partisan approach to the Senate trial. But she undercuts her independence by not criticizing the White House for refusing to allow key witnesses to testify in the House proceedings. She describes the inquiry as "rushed," but doesn't call out the Trump administration for its strategy of running out the clock on the House committees' work. If she takes her responsibilities as a US senator more seriously than her loyalty to the Republican party, she should speak out about obstruction of Congress.
75
Kudos to Senator Murkowski for at least hesitating before putting party and power before country and Constitution, as her GOP Senate peers are doing.
15
@BP Kudos to Representatives Jeff Van Drew of New Jersey, Jared Golden of Maine and Collin Peterson of Minnesota for at least hesitating before putting party and power before country and Constitution, as their Democratic House peers are doing.
2
@BP "Least" - about that.
This impeachment is a political travesty now reduced to grabbing at straws. A wayward ploy too insufficient to bring before the senate and the chief justice of the supreme court. Pelosi's delay in delivering it for trial to the senate should void and nullify what has been a four year rouge endeavor by the extreme left to nullify the 2016 election.
6
@Joe Gilkey
Pelosi could not possibly be reacting to the declarations by Graham and McConnell that they had already decided the verdict and that they would not allow the House to prosecute their case properly, right?
42
@magicisnotreal And how is that any different to what the house has done.
@Joe Gilkey Uh, the House did an investigation and called witnesses, even giving the President's counsel an opportunity to appear before the Judiciary Committee, which they declined because the White House was too focused on obstructing a legitimate investigation. They wanted to move on to a rigged trial in the Senate. Looks like smarter heads, like Murkowski, are starting to prevail.
12
Sorry but her last minute effort to seem somewhat rational is lost on me after the first few attempts. We've seen this act already and it goes nowhere. She will quickly and quietly fall in line as she has done in the past. She, just like the rest of the GOP will nothing to jeopardize her place at the public trough.
57
@Hi Neighbor
What's killing me is the NYT ed board going all in on this reaction to something that took place more than a week ago and has been eclipsed by the declaration of what the verdict WILL be by McConnell since!
It would be good to see Trump testify, under oath, in a Senate trail. That might be why Mitch doesn't want witnesses. A honest Republican sighting is like a Bigfoot sighting, probably not verifiable. Trump people feel the House impeachment hearings where unfair? He's lucky that evidence wasn't presented in a court.
35
@sdt
It is why Mueller the lifelong republican chose not to use his power of subpoena to force Trump to answer in person.
Bravo to Ms. Murkowski. She, unlike her male counterparts seems to remember her Oath of office. Part of this article details Mitch McConnell’s lack of regard for the Oath he took. How many pieces of legislation have been passed by the House this year, but now sit languishing because of McConnell's refusal to put them on any Senate agenda? The American taxpayers are getting no value for the wages, benefits and perks that these Senators have.
23
@Jeannie Bravo? She's done nothing but speak a few words on her local television. When she votes her words then I'll say Bravo.
1
The only and also most important thing in her comments was the Senator saying that” if Democrats wanted some additional witnesses they should have issued subpoenas during the impeachment proceedings in Congress and if necessary went to court to fight for them”
talk about burying the lead.
Without additional witnesses and Kavanaugh coverage like circus around them the Senate trial will be a political disaster for Democrats.
3
@no pretenses Uh, they did.
You want Senate Republicans to stand up and act on principle? Dream on.
59
She’s my senator and I’m so proud.
Maybe if just one person takes their finger out of the dike, the dam will break.
She was starting to worry me when she made remarks criticizing the process. Glad she’s coming around. She’s taking a risk by defying McConnell. Apparently he got vindictive with her after her vote on Kavanaugh.
Now if she and Susan Collins could hang tough together...
16
@Kiska She's not risking anything by speaking on her local station. It's pretense until she actually votes against McConnell. If half her state thinks it should be a fair trial she's just pandering to get reelected. How she votes is the trust test of mettle, not words, hollow without action.
13
@Kiska
I will not consider her as having come around until I hear how she votes.
1
@Kiska And 'no spine" Romney.
At any other time it would be surreal to have the President of the United States, the Senate Majority Leader, and Vladimir Putin describing an historical US event in the same terms, with the same words. Some alternate reality Trump has created for himself.
61
@don healy Absolutely. But here's a thought, if Trump is thrown out in November how fast will Putin say he hardly knew him, never met, etc? How fast will Russian money disappear from the Trump properties? How fast will rumors come out about dirt the Kremlin had on him? How fast will Trump's value as an asset go to zero?
4
@don healy Mitch is all-in with Russia; Putin can count on him every since he took that $1.5 million donation from Depraska during the 2016 campaign. How many other "donations" he took from Russians is uncertain, but this one was outed.
4
@don healy Never thought I would see the day that one of our political parties would literally seek help from a hostile foreign government to win the 2016 election, then deny it happened on a daily basis, then spread Russian propaganda that it was Ukraine that interfered in the election, and then refuse to support legislation to prevent it from happening again in 2020.
TREASON, in my book.
6
Abuse of authority is a concept with which McConnell is intimately familiar. He has been an avid practitioner since before Trump became president. It is therefore no surprise that he would apply his primary skill set in defense of Trump, his judge nominator in chief. He’s not going to appreciate being called out by a mere woman. A Republican woman at that.
12
And even before Trump with his arbitrary hold a hearing on the Garland nomination.
1
Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
Thanks also to Leader Pelosi for holding up the articles of impeachment. This served to provide time for the corruption of McConnell's alliance with the defense to sink in. And it gave space for Senators of conscience to step up. Before McConnell is allowed to start his sham trial it is reasonable to give Senators ample time to explore their minds and hearts.
If Pelosi allows a corrupt, fake trial to begin, she can only be facilitating Trump's exoneration. AG Barr said the President is not below the law. Fine. Allow Trump to have a reputable, are real trial as all citizens are due, complete with witnesses significant to the issue. Then let the Senators go on record for exoneration or conviction.
10
@citizen vox Republicans will NEVER have a fair trial in the Senate. To even hold out a little hope shows complete denial as to what they have become. They have declared war on our democracy, and people need to understand this, and start playing hard ball.
If I were Pelosi, I would never give the Senate the articles, as McConnell has gone on record as saying that he is in lockstep with the Trump administration.
Lisa Murkowski may want a real trial, but the rest of the GOP Senate KNOWS that they can't create a totalitarian state if Donald Trump or any of them are held accountable for betraying America's national security. The rest of the GOP Senate will "stand tall" and defend "Their Moral Beacon" Donald Trump.
8
Sen. Collins says she is "Disturbed" by the coordination between the accused and the juror McConnel.
The word I would choose is "Disqualifying".
8
@Jason
Actually, Collins has not said that. Only Murkowski has.
7
Ms. Murkowski has enjoyed a career as a decoy, and apparently there's nothing the media loves more than a wooden duck. She seldom does more than *talk* about rocking the boat, and then only when she is absolutely sure she isn't taking any chances politically. You may say that this makes her no worse than any other senator, to which I would agree and ask, "Why do we keep hearing about how different she is?"
20
@tony zito Couldn't agree more. Anything she or any other Republican says is complete nonsense. They will NEVER buck Trump on any policy, and will certainly NEVER vote to remove him from office, no matter what he does.
@tony zito
Shhh, they might hear you.
Her vote is the only thing that matters. I'll believe it when I see it.
24
Dems want to call Trump appointees/supporters to testify in Senate trial. Why are Republicans opposing that?
37
When will Democrats and their fellow Americans realize that Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins are just "Charlie Brown's football" that Mitch McConnell will yank away again at the crucial moment? Instead of just stirring their conscience, why don't these Republicans and others in the Senate act on their conscience? Enough hand-wringing, enough concern-trolling, how about some concrete action?
17
It would appear that any U.S. taxpayer or especially those who have lost a loved one defending the the Constitution of the United States of America or better yet sacrificed personally or served the Country would feel strongly about their own Senator's duty to uphold they Constitution they sacrificed for?
They should feel compelled to express that concern to their respective Senators.
Just my opinion.
8
Did the fall 2018 Senate Flake-out (Murkowski somewhat included) get us anything close to an honest investigation of Kavanaugh for the highest court of justice in the land? No, no and not a hint of any real Justice, no.
24
It's a stretch to say Sen. Murkowski is exhibiting opposition to the President or Sen. McConnell, she's just tapping the brakes a bit for who knows what political purpose of her own, this is not the beginning of a revolt against Mr. Trump. As to fairness and correct procedure, what makes the House Democrats think it's their proper place to withhold the Articles of Impeachment from the Senate until they get control of Senate procedure in the matter? They know that won't work, so what are they really doing? They're trying to keep the political fires burning, the smoke billowing; they want to push the whole impeachment controversy as far into the political season as possible to cause Republicans whatever discomfiture they can. Everyone knows this impeachment is just a weapon of political revenge fashioned and deployed by Democrats to punish Mr. Trump for beating them in 2016. Everybody understands that this is a grudge match, nothing more.
5
No. Most readers here have read THE transcript and heard the highlights of the testimony.
1
@Ronald B. Duke: “Everybody understands”? Speak for yourself please. Read the Articles of Impeachment. And if Democrats use the impeachment process for political advantage, good for them. Causing Republicans “discomfiture”? Couldn’t happen to nicer guys... Bullies should expect to be slapped back on occasion.
What a wonderful opportunity for Mr. McConnell to show Democrats how it should be done!
He must organize the process so that the trial can proceed in an orderly manner, demand the presence of witnesses currently blocked by the White House, and call on each juror to give careful and unbiased attention to the evidence and to vote in accordance with conscience, not politics. Then, Justice Roberts (appointed by President Bush in 2005) can set an example of how to preside over a dignified and fair trial so that justice will be served.
After which the President can celebrate his acquittal by inviting all the Republicans who voted for him to the White House for burgers and brewskis. If he orders for all of them, he shouldn't have many left over.
2
I think we also know how Murkowski is going to vote in the end. The only difference between her and the other Republicans is that she wants to be able to say publicly that she at least pretended to look at the evidence.
20
The exact motives of Murkowski are relatively unimportant.
Far more significant is Congressional Democrats finally beginning to pay a modicum of heed to what should have been their top priority as patriotic Americans from the day Trump took office nearly three years ago: finding ways to persuade and pressure Congressional Republicans to also heed their oaths of office.
5
Uh, Lisa Murkowski isn’t a Democrat. Also not sure how this “persuading,” was spozed to work, or why getting people to agree with your prejudgment helps wvoid prejudgment.
@Sage If you look back, the Dems did, but even then the GOP, fox, & trumpsters cried foul, "oh, he's new on the job, give him a chance" But you don't get to be president & be a trainee, especially when you are completely arrogant, ignorant, and incompetent. This is an American Tragedy.
I wouldn't be surprised if Ms. Murkowski's sudden bout of "conscience" is nothing other than an early move in an orchestrated ploy by the GOP Senate to try and trick the house into releasing the articles of impeachment. At this point, the only action a member of the GOP could make that would convince me that they had a conscience or good intention would be leaving the party and joining the Democratic caucus. Anything less is just another ruse.
Truth is, GOP members like Murkowski, Collins, and Romney could probably still win their re-election campaigns and find some grace in the history books if they made the switch, but I doubt any of them have the courage or morality to do so.
28
While I suppose Murkowski’s being “disturbed” by the predetermined outcome of the trial is a good thing, she fails to impress. While stating her concerns about a fixed senate trial may seem courageous to some, the only thing that ultimately matters is how she will vote. And judging by her record, she is a paper tiger, and when push comes to shove she will vote lock step with her Republican colleagues. Anyone want to wager?
18