After the Senate voted against calling additional witnesses, CNN’s chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin proclaimed, “Trump won … that’s how history will remember what went on here.”

In spite of two notorious RINOs breaking ranks and voting to call more witnesses to the impeachment proceedings, the Senate spurned the Democrats’ efforts to drag out the trial, rejecting the motion 51-49. The Republicans-in-name-only who sided with Dems in the vote were Susan Collins and Mitt Romney.

“Trump won. He’s going to win this trial,” said Toobin, a former federal prosecutor. “He won on the issue of witnesses. He’s going to get acquitted. And that’s how history will remember what went on here.”

Toobin went on to say, in reference to John Bolton, “I think history will also record that there are at least one — and perhaps other pivotal, pivotal witnesses who were available to the Senate to talk about the precise issue that is the subject of this impeachment trial and the Senate decided not to hear from him.”

Toobin pointed out to the CNN panel that Bolton has a new book and that he’s “giving speeches for money,” yet the Senate declined to hear from him directly, claiming that is an “absolute travesty.”

The rose-colored, liberal tinge in Toobin’s glasses have been obvious for years, but his ludicrous praise for lead House manager Rep. Adam Schiff’s opening argument in the Senate impeachment trial last week drew scorn from many corners. “I thought it was dazzling,” Toobin claimed. “I thought the way he wove through both the facts of the case and the historical context was really remarkable. It was the second-best courtroom address — since it’s like a courtroom — that I ever heard.”

The Senate vote on additional witnesses was close. The margin of victory for Republicans was attributable to the decisions by fence-sitting GOP members Lisa Murkowski and Lamar Alexander to oppose calling additional witnesses and extending the deleterious Dem charade any further. Nonetheless, the two senators sought to retain claim to the RINOculous middle ground with criticisms of the president and failures of the Congress as an institution in statements defending their votes.

“It was inappropriate for the president to ask a foreign leader to investigate his political opponent and to withhold United States aid to encourage that investigation,” said Alexander. “… But the Constitution does not give the Senate the power to remove the president from office and ban him from this year’s ballot simply for actions that are inappropriate.”

“As an institution, the Congress has failed,” Murkowski declared. “The House chose to send articles of impeachment that are rushed and flawed. I carefully considered the need for additional witnesses and documents, to cure the shortcomings of its process, but ultimately decided that I will vote against considering motions to subpoena.”

Had the Senate voted in favor of calling in more witnesses, former national security adviser Bolton would have been the prime target for Democrats, given the recent leaks from his unpublished book. Republicans, in turn, would have sought to subpoena testimony from Joe Biden and his son Hunter with regard to their involvement in the Ukraine corruption at the heart of the alleged wrongdoing by the president when he sought to investigate the matter.

All he does is win win win !!! — ???? (@Rockprincess818) January 31, 2020

Imagine the melt down after he’s re-elected… — sburn (@vetes928) January 31, 2020