Thread by @CherylHirschi

@marcorubio 1/ This entire statement is not just disingenuous & filled w/ bogus argumts, but it is irrelevant! Yesterday’s vote was NOT a vote to acquit or convict. Yesterday’s vote was a vote to allow the Senate body to see documents & hear witnesses who would testify to what they know...

@marcorubio 2/ & saw regarding the charges against Trump, to give you, & every member, the evidence you would need as a judge in this trial to fairly determine his guilt or innocence.
This vote should have been 100-0 if the Senate members were living up to their oath to do impartial...

@marcorubio 3/ justice & allow all evidence to be entered into the record.

Instead, you and your party chose to hide the truth & to not provide a fair trial. You will be making a decision, arguably the most important & grave decision of your career, whether to convict and remove a...

@marcorubio 4/ President from office, w/out ALL evidence available to you. Any decision is only as good as the information you use to make that decision. The fact that you chose to NOT hear all the evidence available automatically makes your decision, whether guilty or innocent, & every...

@marcorubio 5/ Senate member’s decision, a flawed decision. As a lawyer, have you ever participated in a trial where the defendant gets to choose which witnesses and documents are allowed into evidence? NO! You have not!

@marcorubio 6/
Now let’s take a look at your statement, shall we?

1st paragraph: So what? There has to be a first time for everything! This shouldn’t even be a part of your calculations as to whether his actions warrant removal.

@marcorubio 7/
5th paragraph: Your party made it so! GOP refused to even consider facts, LIED about being “allowed” to participate when 45 Republican House members were part of those hearings. WH CHOSE not to participate, as proven thru official letters from WH which backs up Article 2

@marcorubio 8/ 6th paragraph: Flat out lie! Purpose of Articles WAS to protect the country. Trump is actively trying to recruit a foreign power to rig the next election. That’s why House knew we could not allow Trump to use the courts, as he has his entire life, to delay impeachmt...

@marcorubio 9/ until after the election when it would be too late. Interference by a foreign power in our elections is EXACTLY what our Founders feared. Pelosi never said that was the purpose, she said those words after Trump tried to deny he'd been impeached.

@marcorubio 10/ 14th paragraph: No president or judge who has faced an impeachment trial has EVER refused to turn over ALL documents or witnesses. Clinton model included witnesses, so you are in fact NOT following the Clinton model. Additionally executive privilege is applied...

@marcorubio 11/ to specific questions asked and is far different than “absolute immunity” which does not exist & courts have already ruled so in McGahn case. As a lawyer you know that and are intentionally misrepresenting the facts to your constituents.

@marcorubio 12/ 15th paragraph: This argument is at best disingenuous. You are trying to play both sides of the fence. As explained above,Trump uses the courts as a weapon to delay. He knew if he forced the House to go to court the clock would run out...

@marcorubio 13/ before the election & he would be free to continue trying to rig the election. Fortunately, the House had a few patriotic witnesses come forward, despite Trump’s threats, to provide enough evidence for the House to indict & send to your body for a trial. Now the Senate is...

@marcorubio 14/ using the same argument to justify not calling witnesses in the trial when you have a Chief Justice in the room who could rule if majority of Senators agreed to allow Roberts to subpoena witnesses & docs. Yet, you refuse to do so, once again voluntarily hiding the truth.

@marcorubio 15/ 19th paragraph: “And ultimately, voters themselves can hold the President accountable in an election, including the one just 9 months from now.” WE CANNOT HOLD HIM ACCOUNTABLE IN AN ELECTION IF THE ELECTION IS RIGGED!!!!!...which is what he is trying to do and you know it!!!

@marcorubio 16/ 20th paragraph: “w/out broad public support” This is rich! 75% of the country wants to hear from witnesses and 50+% want him convicted and removed. Broad public support is there! Pay attention!

@marcorubio 17/ 22nd paragraph: “They cannot argue that fairness demands we seek witnesses they did little to pursue.” This is a ridiculous statement! New witnesses pop up all the time in trials & they don’t reject them just because their testimony wasn’t heard in preparing the indictment.

@marcorubio 18/ Would you reject a witness in a trial you were defending or prosecuting who was found after the trial started if he was an eyewitness to the crime? Of course not.

@marcorubio 19/
23rd paragraph: “The prosecution proved their case BUT it does not reach my threshold for conviction.” WHAT? Prosecution proved their case but I need more evidence to convict him, BUT I just voted to allow no more evidence. This is the most laughable statement of all!

@marcorubio 20/Trump is trying to rig our next election in his favor thus taking away the voice of the people which is the foundation of this democracy!!!!! Please tell me what exactly would meet your threshold for conviction? More evidence which you just voted not to allow?

@marcorubio 21/ 24th paragraph: Obama wasn’t trying to rig an election. You just disagreed w/ his policies therefore not impeachable.
Red herring.

@marcorubio 22/ 25th paragraph: “Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), the President Pro Tempore Emeritus, once warned, “[A] partisan impeachment cannot command the respect of the American people. It is no more valid than a stolen election.”

For you to use THIS quote as your closing is the...

@marcorubio 23/ irony to end all ironies!!!

Your party is intentionally making this a partisan impeachment by working w/ the defendant to rig the trial in his favor AND HIS ALLEGED CRIME IS TO STEAL AN ELECTION!!!!/END

@marcorubio Addendum: You, Sen. Rubio said during the 2016 campaign that we (Republicans) should not use Wikileaks info because next time it could be used against our party’s candidate and now YOU ARE SANCTIONING EXACTLY WHAT YOU SPOKE AGAINST IN 2016!