In a column for the Washington Post, conservative and avid "never-Trumper" Jennifer Rubin expressed frustration with GOP House lawmakers who refused -- at the very least -- to vote for proceeding with a public impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump.
Based upon the President's own comments and leaked testimony from administration officials speaking to House investigators behind closed doors, Rubin said that it should be obvious to anyone that the facts in the case are not in Trump's favor.
"President Trump insists we read the transcript of his July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Multiple witnesses verify virtually all of the transcript (save for Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman who says in one additional spot, former vice president Joe Biden and his son Hunter were explicitly mentioned). The contents of the call match the whistleblower’s complaint," she began before pointing out the new witnesses have corroborated the whistleblower's complaint.
Based upon what has come out so far, Rubin asked, "So what’s the fight over?"
"The House should lay out the full weight of the evidence and call the parade of credible witnesses to educate the American people," she suggested. "A vote against impeachment is then a vote to support the proposition that a president can use government funds to extort foreign governments to investigate and manufacture evidence against a political rival. Let the House Republicans vote against that and explain it to anyone not addicted to Fox News."
Backing up her case, Rubin pointed out some obvious facts.
"Trump says he did it. The witnesses say he did it," she wrote. "Republican Senators can then decide if this is a violation of Trump’s oath."
"This is not rocket science, which explains why Republicans clung to misleading complaints about the process," she lectured. "If the president has no facts in his favor, then this was not a hoax or a witch hunt. It is an existential question: Who controls our democracy? Understandably, Trump is baffled. We will see if GOP senators want to enable such moral obtuseness and constitutional chaos."
You can read the whole piece here.