Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) argued Friday that impeachable actions don’t always mean a president should be convicted, saying lawmakers must also weigh the impact of removal from office.
“Just because actions meet a standard of impeachment does not mean it is in the best interest of the country to remove a President from office,” Rubio wrote in a Medium post.
“Determining which outcome is in the best interests requires a political judgment — one that takes into account both the severity of the wrongdoing alleged but also the impact removal would have on the nation,” he said.
Rubio also suggested that removing Trump from office would be a victory for Russian President Vladimir Putin.
“Can anyone doubt that at least half of the country would view his removal as illegitimate — as nothing short of a coup d’état? It is difficult to conceive of any scheme Putin could undertake that would undermine confidence in our democracy more than removal would,” Rubio wrote.
Rubio explained why, like most GOP senators, he would not support calling for witnesses at Trump’s impeachment trial, adding that he rejects “the argument that unless we call new witnesses this is not a fair trial.”
“Nevertheless, new witnesses that would testify to the truth of the allegations are not needed for my threshold analysis, which already assumed that all the allegations made are true,” Rubio said.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.