“I’ve been very disappointed in some who have chosen to talk about this from a political perspective,” said Sen. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.), a moderate Democrat. “There are senators on both sides of the aisle who have said things that are highly partisan. And have talked about this as a political endeavor rather than ... to approach it as our job which is a potential jurist."

But partisanship on impeachment appears inevitable, with Republicans questioning the legitimacy of the impeachment inquiry and some Democrats, like 2020 candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) already saying that Trump should be impeached. Even Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said in a recent campaign ad that impeachment stops with him as long as he remains the GOP leader.

And some senators don’t agree that their role as jurors prevents them from discussing the latest developments unfolding in the Ukraine scandal.

“It’s a false and spurious argument,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a former federal prosecutor. “We’re not in a jury trial in the classic criminal sense. It is a political proceeding and we shirk our duty to the nation if we fail to talk.”

Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) has emphasized that he will be an independent juror. But that’s not going to stop him from defending Trump “as long as he deserves defending."

“I don’t think we should shirk our responsibilities as senators ... just because one day we might be a juror, ” Cramer said. “For some people it’s fairly convenient to say that, I understand that, their situation is different. But I’ve never been very good at shrinking."

While many senators have refrained from commenting on the evidence presented before House investigators, that hasn’t stopped Senate Republicans from attacking the House’s impeachment proceedings.

Following explosive testimony from top Ukraine diplomat Bill Taylor, many Republicans argued Wednesday they couldn’t fairly evaluate Taylor’s opening statement without having access to his full deposition.

"I'm not going to give any legitimacy to these proceedings," said Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.).

But some say they can maintain their criticism of the House impeachment process without revealing where they’d come down in a final verdict.

“It’s still fair game to be concerned about the process," said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) "But I think not trying to reach a conclusion before the House does, or before you have all the information that the House would be likely to present, is the right place for senators to be.”

Many senators also see no up-side to commenting this early on the impeachment proceedings. With the House impeachment inquiry moving full steam ahead, more damning information about the president could be revealed in the coming weeks. And there’s no benefit to jumping to a conclusion, especially given that the Senate may not take up impeachment proceedings until early next year.

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) said he plans to wait on an impeachment decision until he is presented with all of the relevant evidence at the Senate’s trial.

“It’s a mistake to take testimony until it’s all out there,” Rubio said. “Put it all together and view it in the full context of it.”

Even though a trial could still be months away, some are already tired of getting asked on a daily basis about the House’s impeachment inquiry.

“I’m not going to do a thing until we see the facts, if it comes to us,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). “It wears me out when I hear them talking about all that [day-to-day impeachment reporting]. I usually turn stations.”