Cassidy bucks GOP on impeachment procedural vote

Staff Report
U.S. Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., broke ranks with most of his fellow Republicans on Tuesday and voted to affirm the constitutionality of the impeachment trial of former President Donald Trump.
But Cassidy warned that his vote doesn’t mean that he’s leaning toward a vote for conviction.
Louisiana’s other senator, Republican John Kennedy, voted against the measure that allowed the trial to move forward Wednesday.
The constitutionality was affirmed by a 56-44 vote. Cassidy was one of six Republicans voting for the measure. The others were Mitt Romney of Utah, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Ben Sasse of Nebraska, Susan Collins of Maine and Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania.
“We heard arguments from both sides on the constitutionality of having a Senate trial of a president who has since left office,” Cassidy said in a statement Tuesday. “A sufficient amount of evidence of constitutionality exists for the Senate to proceed with the trial.
“This vote is not a prejudgment on the final vote to convict. If anyone disagrees with my vote and would like an explanation, I ask them to listen to the arguments presented by the House Managers and former President Trump’s lawyers. The House managers had much stronger constitutional arguments. The president’s team did not.”
The Center Square reported that the Louisiana GOP issued a statement praising Kennedy while declaring the party “profoundly disappointed” in Cassidy.
Other Republican officials have faced censure from their state parties because of their stands on impeachment or whether there was widespread fraud in the 2020 president election. Most notable is U.S. Rep. Liz Cheney, R-Wyoming, who voted for impeachment in the House of Representatives.
The sole article of impeachment against Trump alleges that he incited an insurrection before the Jan. 6 storming of the U.S. Capitol by protesters intent on halting the official count of presidential electors.
The House impeachment managers have argued that the former president bears responsibility for the event because he encouraged supporters to “fight like hell” and not to be weak in remarks shortly before they marched on the Capitol.
Trump’s defenders have argued that he was speaking figuratively and that his words constituted political speech protected by the First Amendment.
The constitutional question centered on whether a president no longer in office is subject to impeachment and conviction.