Let’s check out what the 43 Republicans who voted to acquit Trump are saying tonight:

Marsha Blackburn (TN):

Roy Blunt (MO):

“I said before this trial started that I believe the constitutional purpose for presidential impeachment is to remove a president from office, not to punish a person after they have left office. None of the arguments presented changed my view that this was an unconstitutional proceeding. Impeachment is not a tool that should be used to settle political scores against a private citizen.”

John Boozman (AR):

Mike Braun (IN):

“I said before this trial started that I believe the constitutional purpose for presidential impeachment is to remove a president from office, not to punish a person after they have left office. None of the arguments presented changed my view that this was an unconstitutional proceeding. Impeachment is not a tool that should be used to settle political scores against a private citizen.”

Shelley Moore Capito (WV):

John Cornyn (TX):

Tom Cotton (AR): No statement yet

Kevin Cramer (ND):

Mike Crapo (ID):

“This week’s trial was unconstitutional.  The House’s impeachment proceeding blatantly violated established guarantees of due process.  Furthermore, the plain text of the Constitution limits impeachment to current civil officers of the United States, specifically stating that, ‘The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.’  Both by text and by precedent, the Constitution does not allow impeaching private citizens–even those who formerly occupied federal office.  Private citizens are subject to accountability for their actions under our legal justice system.  We must not dismiss the foundational tenets of our Constitution, particularly in the heat of the deep divisions we face in America. 

“The violent, despicable acts of January 6th have shaken our republic to its core and must not go unpunished.  Investigations, arrests and court proceedings are already underway for those responsible, and law enforcement and the National Guard are vigilant in maintaining order on Capitol Hill and elsewhere in our country. 

Ted Cruz:

WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) issued the following statement after voting to reject Democrats’ Article of Impeachment and to acquit Donald Trump:

“The impeachment of Donald Trump on the charge of incitement was merely a rushed act of partisan retribution. I was against the Senate taking jurisdiction in this trial from the start, as the House had chosen to impeach without providing due process or introducing evidence.

“The House brought only one charge before the Senate: incitement. Donald Trump used heated language, but he did not urge anyone to commit acts of violence. The legal standard for incitement is very high and it is clear by the results of this vote that the House Managers failed to present a coherent standard for incitement. 

“In the United States, politicians from all parties and across the country routinely use words and phrases like ‘fight,’ ‘win,’ and ‘take back our country’ in speeches and interviews, including numerous Senate Democrats and House Impeachment Managers. Using this rhetoric is not impeachable, whether made by Republicans or Democrats. 

“As I’ve said repeatedly, what we saw on January 6 was a despicable terrorist attack on the United States Capitol and those who carried it out should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Unfortunately, this impeachment trial did nothing to bring the domestic terrorists who committed this heinous attack to justice. It merely satisfied Democrats’ desire to once again vent their hatred of Donald Trump and their contempt for the tens of millions of Americans who voted for him.

“Doing so did nothing to address the many critical challenges facing our country. This impeachment certainly didn’t help the tens of millions of Americans out of work or the millions of kids who aren’t able to go to school.  

“As always, I will continue to work to ensure that America defeats the coronavirus pandemic while pursuing a vision for the country that expands freedom and opportunity for each and every American.” 

Steve Daines (MT):

Joni Ernst (IA): Click here.

Deb Fischer (NE):

“It remains true that Congress simply does not have the constitutional authority to impeach a former president. And rather than take its take time to hold hearings and assess all evidence, the House had a rushed impeachment process that denied President Trump due process. Accordingly, I voted to acquit President Trump. It is now time to come together and move forward,” said Senator Fischer.

Lindsay Graham (SC):

Chuck Grassley (IA): It’s long. Read it here.

Bill Hagerty (TN):

Josh Hawley (MO): No statement yet

John Hoeven (ND):

“The Founding Fathers designed impeachment as a way to remove a President from office. That is why I believe it is unconstitutional and voted against trying to apply impeachment to a former president, after he has left office. That would be impeaching a private citizen. Constitutional scholars have clearly and effectively made that determination, and it is further reinforced by the fact that the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court did not preside. 

“President Trump should not have encouraged the protest on January 6, but those rioters who broke the law are responsible for their actions and we must condemn all those who engage in violence. Now that the trial is over, we need to work in a bipartisan way to address the challenges facing our nation.”

Cindy Hyde-Smith (MS):

“First, the impeachment of a former President is not part of the Constitution, which states clearly that ‘impeachment shall not extend further than to remove from office.’  Donald Trump is no longer the President.

“Second, I believe the defense team proved conclusively that President Trump’s speech on January 6 neither implicitly nor explicitly encouraged the use of violence or lawless action.

“We are a nation struggling with a public health emergency and economic trouble.  This politically motivated impeachment trial represents another unnecessary and troubling chapter to the terrible crimes committed against our government on January 6.  Our efforts should be focused on prosecuting the lawbreakers, improving Capitol security, and healing the wounds of those hurt on that sad day.”

Jim Inhofe (OK):

“My plain reading of Article II, Section IV of the Constitution led me to believe that the Founders did not intend for us to impeach and try former presidents, which is why today I voted to acquit former President Trump. Just as we cannot impeach and convict former Presidents Carter, Bush, Clinton or Obama today for anything they did during their presidency, we cannot, based on my reading of the Constitution, convict former President Trump.

“However, what was undisputable on January 6 and was reiterated over the last few days, was the criminal, horrific violence that took place that day. It was tragic for our nation and for our democracy—and I will always be grateful to all law enforcement, especially Capitol Police, who placed their lives on the line to protect us.”  

Ron Johnson (WI):

“The Democrats’ vindictive and divisive political impeachment is over. While there are still many questions that remain unanswered, I do know neither the Capitol breach nor this trial should have ever occurred. Hopefully, true healing can now begin.” 

John Kennedy (LA):

“My job as a senator and juror in an impeachment trial is not—NOT—to defend, excuse or explain anyone’s behavior—not the Capitol rioters’, not the Democrats’, not the president’s. My job is to evaluate the evidence.

“In my judgment, impeachment is not supposed to be political sport where one party seeks advantage over the other at the expense of the country.

“The merits of the Democrats’ case were not even close.

“The Democrats afforded the president no due process in the House—no hearings, no investigation, no right to be heard, no defense. No one is above the law, but no one is beneath it.

“Second, the president is no longer the president. We were asked to impeach a guy in Florida. The Democrats never proved jurisdiction.

“Third, the Democrats charged President Trump with inciting a riot through his speech, but then the Democrats introduced evidence that the riot was pre-planned. The Democrats disproved their own case.

“There are one or two things I think we can all agree on: The nut jobs who violated the Capitol on Jan. 6 should be prosecuted and jailed. There can be no justice without order. Political violence is wrong. Always. It was wrong on Jan. 6, and it was wrong during the riots this summer.

“Finally, both parties should be big tents, but those big tents should each have a big door to kick out extremists who exist on both sides.”

James Lankford (OK):

“I cannot support removing someone from office who is not in office. An impeachment trial after someone has left office is unconstitutional.”

The former president was acquitted by the Senate. Prior to the trial, Lankford supported a point of order on the constitutionality of the trial of a former president. The US Constitution outlines the basic process for impeachment and trial of the president, but it says nothing about trying a former president: “The president…shall be removed from office on impeachment…” (Article II, Section 4) and “when the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside.” (Article I, Section 3, Clause 6) Additionally, “judgment in cases of impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office.” (Article I, Section 3, Clause 7)

Four of the states in 1787 had impeachment clauses in their state constitution that specifically allowed impeaching a former official, but when they wrote the United States Constitution they only allowed current officials.  

Mike Lee (UT):

“The House managers’ burden in this trial was to prove first, that the Senate should exercise its impeachment jurisdiction in a case against a former president; and second, that he committed the high crime of inciting an insurrection. The House managers did not clear either hurdle.

“No one can condone the horrific violence that occurred on January 6, 2021–or President Trump’s words, actions, and omissions on that day. I certainly do not.

“But, the fact is that the word ‘incitement’ has a very specific meaning in the law, and Donald Trump’s words and actions on January 6, 2021, fell short of that standard. The House rushed its impeachment without an investigation, charged President Trump with a crime it failed properly to allege, and then sat on its poorly worded Article until after he left office.

“Given the politically suspicious process, the Senate should never have exercised jurisdiction over this Article in the first place. Convicting a former official would be an unprecedented and constitutionally dubious step—never before has the Senate convicted an impeached official after that official has left office. The House managers never demonstrated why that step was necessary in this case.

“On the contrary, throughout the trial, the House managers repeatedly relied on hearsay, erroneous media reports, and political rhetoric rather than evidence.

“Faced with the weak presentation of a deficient case demanding unprecedented constitutional action against a private citizen, acquittal was the only option I could deem consistent with the law, the facts, and the Constitution.”

Cynthia Lummis (WY):

“From the start, I made it clear that I believed this exercise was an unconstitutional distraction that prevented Congress from addressing the very real issues that Wyoming citizens are dealing with. While we spent a week on a political sideshow to which we already knew the ending (acquittal), Congress could have been working on a bipartisan COVID relief package to help struggling businesses in Wyoming. We could have been working to safely reopen schools as health experts recommend. We could have been marking up the POWER Act to ensure American energy independence. Instead, we spent the last week trying to impeach a private citizen from an office he no longer holds – at the expense of American taxpayers.”

“With this trial, I fear Democrats have sent a dangerous precedent that enables any former President to be subjected to this spectacle all in the name of political theater. The people of Wyoming deserve better.”

Roger Marshall (KS):

Mitch McConnell (KY): Click here.

Jerry Moran (KS):

“The violence at the United States Capitol on January 6 was an attempt to subvert democracy, and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms. Rioters and extremists sought to prevent Members of Congress and Vice President Pence from performing their constitutional obligation to affirm the results of an election, and President Trump was wrong to continue to spread allegations of widespread fraud and not immediately discourage the reprehensible and unpatriotic behavior.

“The Constitution does not clearly state whether a former president can be tried for impeachment by the Senate, but I believe the impeachment process is intended to be used for considering whether or not ‘The President’ should be removed from office. Because former President Trump is no longer in office, I voted to acquit. Establishing the precedent that the Senate has jurisdiction to convict a former president would cause extreme damage to our country and the future of the presidency.”

Rand Paul (KY): No formal statement, but he said a few things here.

Rob Portmann (OH):

James Risch (ID):

“The purpose of the constitutional authority of impeachment is to remove the president from office. The person Democrats attempted to impeach was no longer in office. The United States Senate has no jurisdiction over a private citizen and thus impeachment was and is impossible.

“It’s time we stop the political hate and vitriol and move forward wiser and stronger just as America has countless times before.”

Mike Rounds (SD):

Marco Rubio (FL): It’s long. Read it here.

Rick Scott (FL):

Tim Scott (SC): Commented yesterday on Fox News..

Richard Shelby (AL):

“The Constitution speaks of removing a sitting president, not a private citizen.  I recently voted to dismiss this case based on its questionable constitutionality.  The Framers were clear in limiting impeachment to the President, Vice President, and civil officers of the United States.  That is why today, I voted to acquit.”

Dan Sullivan (AK): It’s long. Read it here.

John Thune (SD):

“The impeachment trial is over and former President Trump has been acquitted. My vote to acquit should not be viewed as exoneration for his conduct on January 6, 2021, or in the days and weeks leading up to it. What former President Trump did to undermine faith in our election system and disrupt the peaceful transfer of power is inexcusable.

“But he is no longer president. The Constitution is clear that the primary purpose of impeachment is removal from office, and that’s what I believe the Founders intended. I have great concerns with the Senate punishing a private citizen with the sole intent of disqualifying him from holding future office. Our Founders designed impeachment to be an extreme remedy and cautioned against its use as a political weapon. We should heed their caution. In our democracy, matters of representation should be left with the people, as the Founders intended.

“I have faith in the American people and the strength of our democracy.”  

Thom Tillis (NC): It’s long. Read it here.

Tommy Tuberville (AL):

Robert Wicker (MS):

“During the nearly 234 years of our Constitution’s existence, no public official has ever been convicted in an impeachment trial after leaving office. That long-standing precedent was followed again today.

“After carefully reviewing the evidence and legal arguments from counsel for both parties, I am convinced that impeachment was intended only as a means of removing presidents and other officials from office. On two occasions during this trial, I had already voted not to proceed to trial based on this jurisdictional issue. My vote for acquittal today was consistent with those previous votes.

“Like all Americans, I am deeply troubled by the violent actions of individuals who invaded the U.S. Capitol and attacked our law enforcement officers on January 6. The facts surrounding this attack should be fully and thoroughly investigated, and those criminals should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

“I hope we can put this trial behind us and recommit to the cooperative spirit we need to meet our republic’s pressing challenges.”

Todd Young (IN):