Alexander the Small

So, Lamar Alexander (R-TN) said that he didn't want to hear witnesses because he was convinced that the House Managers made their case.  Later, on NPR, he explained further that if you're on a jury for a car accident and eight witnesses say someone left the scene, you don't need to hear a ninth.

How weird.  How empty.  How meaningless.  What a twisted, convoluted effort to try to explain why he was going to do something irresponsible and not vote for witnesses despite acknowledging the defendant was guility.

Three things.  All pretty easy.  All pretty basic.

First, just because he himself was convinced that the House Managers made their case doesn't mean that all the other Senate jurors were as convinced.  In fact, as I suspect we're about to see, the Republicans are going to vote to acquit Trump, which means that they weren't as convinced as Alexander -- which, of course, is why you would want to hear witnesses.

Second, if indeed, Lamar Alexander heard enough evidence to convince him that the House Managers made their case that Trump was guilty of an impeachable act, then I think it's fair to presume Mr. Alexander will be voted to convict Trump and expel him office.  And I think it's also fair to bet that he will not vote to convict Trump.  Which means that he did not hear enough evidence -- which, of course, is why you would want to hear witnesses, to all them to make that further case of why jurors should vote to actually convict.

And third, by Mr. Alexander's scenario of car crash witnesses, he appears to be prescient, having certain knowledge of what that ninth witness will say.  In fact, we don't know until the witness is under oath and cross-examined.  For all we know, that ninth witness will not only say that the person did not leave the scene of the crime, but present video evidence that the person was still there the whole time.

Clearly, we have an idea what John Bolton would likely have said.  But -- as Trump's own lawyers pointed out, the news story about his book was not a first-hand account.  Nor was it under oath.  Moreover, there were three or four other witnesses that Democrats wanted to call -- and several that Republicans wanted to call.  I would suggest that Lamar Alexander doesn't have any idea exactly what any of them would say, most especially under oath.

And other Republicans used Alexander's "reasoning" as support of their own views.  Rob Portman (R-OH) sent out a tweet that Lamar Alexander spoke for him and several other Republican senators.

​Well, bully for them.

​Which once again is why this is not about Trump.  This is about the elected members of the Republican Party who enable him and are complicit