After deliberating for a long time, Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander announced he would vote against witness summons: "There is no need for more evidence to speak that does not meet the threshold for impeachment."

• Photo: AFP

After much effort and powerful pressure exerted by the Democratic Senate House Democrats and Democrats, it appears that after the Thursday-Friday night, Republicans can register a feat. Republican Sen. Lamar Alexander, who represents the state of Tennessee, announced after long days of deliberation that he intended to oppose Democrats' request to call for more witnesses in the impeachment trial.

More on:

Democrats are starting to choose - Trump will try to steal the show

Republican achievement? The first day of Trump's impeachment trial

Trump Attorneys: The impeachment will now be dangerous

Discussions about Trump's ouster // Photo: Reuters

Senator Alexander was one of four Republican senators who wavered over whether to vote with Democrats and cross the line to summon more witnesses to testify in a Senate impeachment trial, with the key prosecution that Democrats want to summon to testify is former President John Security's national security adviser.

After being delayed in making a decision on the matter, during the night, Senator Alexander pitched his case on the issue of witnessing the Twitter network through a 15-tweet thread. "There is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven, and something that does not meet the threshold of the U.S. Constitution for the impeachment offense," he wrote in one of his tweets on the subject.

Senator Lamar Alkander: "The thing that does not meet the threshold of the US Constitution for impeachment offense" / Photo: IP

Sen. Alkander's decision appears to have been largely based on the approach presented by President Trump's defense lawyer, Professor Alan Dershowitz, who has made quite a few headlines in the United States. Dershowitz's view that even if there was a quid pro quo deal here, it still does not meet the constitutionally required threshold to lead to the president's ouster.

Speaking on Dershowitz's approach, Senator Lamar Alexander tweeted on Twitter that "it was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to interrogate his political opponent and pause American aid to encourage the investigation," he wrote, adding that "the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to oust the president. And forbid him from running for elections this year only because of unworthy actions. "

I worked with other senators to make sure we had the right to ask for more documents and witnesses, but there is no need for more evidence to prove something that has already been proven and that does not meet the US Constitution's high bar for an impeachable offense.1 / 15

- Sen. Lamar Alexander (@SenAlexander) January 31, 2020

Sen. Lamar Alkander, along with Sen. Mitt Romney, Sen. Suzanne Collins and Sen. Liza Murkowski, are one of four Republican senators who have been rocking the question of allowing Democrats to call additional witnesses, including, as mentioned, John Bolton. Last night, Senators Romney and Collins confirmed their intention to vote alongside Democrats to allow witnesses to be convened, while Sen. Murkowski has yet to make a decision.

John Bolton, who until several months ago served as President Trump's national security adviser, wrote in his (unpublished) book that President Trump did tie military aid at the cost of hundreds of millions of dollars to Ukraine in demanding to investigate his political rival from the Democratic Party, Joe Biden.

Republicans have a majority of 53 versus 47 Senate Democrats. To call witnesses, a normal majority of 51 senators will need to approve the decision. If the four swinging senators, including Alkander, would vote with the Democrats, they would have been able to get the special majority to call the witnesses. Now that Sen. Alexander has announced his intention to vote alongside Republicans, and against the motion for more witnesses, Democrats can at best achieve 50-50 equality in voting - a result that would not allow them to summon additional witnesses to the presidential impeachment trial.