Democratic Sen. Doug Jones may vote against convicting Trump in impeachment if 'dots aren't connected'

William Cummings | USA TODAY

Show Caption Hide Caption Presidential impeachment: Clinton, Johnson, Nixon test U.S. democracy Presidents have been impeached, but none have been removed from office due to impeachment. Confusing? Here's how.

Sen. Doug Jones, who faces a tough 2020 reelection battle as a Democrat in Alabama, said Sunday that he is open to voting to acquit President Donald Trump on the two articles of impeachment approved last week by the House of Representatives if he feels the evidence in the case is lacking.

Trump is accused of abusing his power by withholding military aid to pressure Ukraine into opening investigations that he thought would benefit him politically. The president has denied using the aid as leverage, and his defenders have said his push for the investigations was motivated by his concern about corruption.

Jones said in an interview on ABC's "This Week" that if the allegations are proven, "I think it's an impeachable matter."

"If a president of the United States is using his office and the power of the presidency" to "withhold aid that is there to battle Russians," and "he's doing that just to get a political advantage for his own personal campaign, that is a serious, serious matter."

Jones said he hadn't watched all of the testimony and debate in the House impeachment inquiry and was still "trying to see if the dots get connected."

"But if those dots aren't connected and there are other explanations that I think are consistent with innocence, I will go that way too," he said.

Poll: Majority approve of Trump's impeachment and removal from office

Impeachment: Trump says he gives Democrat Tulsi Gabbard 'a lot of respect' for voting 'present'

Jones said there were "gaps in testimony," which he blamed on the lack of cooperation from the White House, that he wants to see filled before making his decision.

"I would like to see a full and complete picture. And we don't have that because the president has refused to have his people come and testify and deliver documents," he said.

The unwillingness to hand over documents or allow administration officials to testify is why House Democrats included obstruction of Congress along with abuse of power in the articles of impeachment against Trump. Though Jones lamented the lack of White House cooperation, he did not say whether that was sufficient to convict Trump on the obstruction charge.

Jones denied he was equivocating because he was concerned about reelection and said impeachment was too important for the decision to be based on a fear of political consequences.

"This has to do with the future of the presidency, and how we want our presidents to conduct themselves," Jones said. "If I did everything based on a pure and political argument, all you'd need is a computer to mash a button."

Sen. Dick Durbin agreed with Jones and said too many of their Senate colleagues on both sides of the aisle were putting politics ahead of their role as impartial jurors in an impeachment trial.

"As far as I'm concerned, they can tell which way they're leaning or how they feel in terms of the probability, but when it comes to saying, I made up my mind, it's all over, for goodness' sakes, that is not what the Constitution envisioned," Durbin said on CNN's "State of the Union."

Both Durbin and Jones defended House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's decision to delay sending articles of impeachment to the Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., until she knows how McConnell plans to conduct the trial.

"I can understand Speaker Pelosi would like to have some idea of how this case is going to be presented. That's not unreasonable," Durbin said.

Sen. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., disagreed and said he did not think Pelosi "has the right to do this or the power to do this."

"The speaker has a lot of power. But once the House has spoken, the speaker doesn't get the decision as to whether or not she transmits that decision to the Senate, in my view," Blunt said.

He said withholding the articles of impeachment from the Senate was a tactical error on Pelosi's part.

"I think this has looked pretty political anyway, and this is sort of the icing on the political cake," he said. "I mean, the outcome here is virtually certain. As I have been saying, for weeks, a partisan vote in the House would almost certainly result in a partisan vote in the Senate."

Though Blunt did not say he had made up his mind on how he would vote in a Senate trial, he said he did not think House Democrats "came close to making the case."

Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., was less subtle. He said on Fox News' "Sunday Morning Futures" that Pelosi was "taking a wrecking ball to the Constitution" and called the threat to withhold the articles of impeachment "the latest in a series of constitutional train wrecks orchestrated by Nancy Pelosi."

He accused Pelosi of "trying to tell Mitch McConnell how to run the Senate" and "trampling on the separation of powers."

Graham, who has said he's made up his mind and wants Trump acquitted as quickly as possible, equated the obstruction of Congress charge against the president to denying him his legal rights to fight subpoenas in court, and said he could not imagine any senator voting to convict Trump on that charge.

"If you deny him his day in court, then you're abusing the constitutional rights of Donald Trump as president and you're putting the entire presidency at risk," Grham said, "I can't imagine any senator doing this to the presidency."

The Democrat-controlled House Judiciary Committee disagreed in its final impeachment report, arguing the Constitution gave the power of impeachment solely to the House and that by issuing a "blanket ban on compliance with House subpoenas" Trump has shown his aim is "obstructing the exercise of its constitutional impeachment power, rather than seeking judicial review."

"Even when the House urges expedition, it usually takes years – not months – to obtain documents or testimony" through the courts, the report said. It concluded that allowing Trump to use the judicial system to stall the process would effectively take away Congress' impeachment power.

Flake to GOP: What would you do if it were Barack Obama, not Donald Trump?