Lindsey Graham (S.C.): “I read the transcript and found nothing wrong with it.”
Tim Scott (S.C.): “There is nothing that I saw in the transcript that was an impeachable offense. I find him to be innocent of an impeachable offense.”
John Kennedy (La.): “Did the president have a culpable state of mind? … Based on the evidence that I see, that I’ve been allowed to see, the president does not have a culpable state of mind.”
Kevin Cramer (N.D.): “It would be troubling if any president did a quid pro quo with tax dollars … but so far we don’t have evidence that’s happened.”
Ron Johnson (Wis.): “We have proper agreements with countries to investigate potential crimes so I don’t think there’s anything improper about doing that.”
Joni Ernst (Iowa): “I’ve looked at the transcript; I don’t see anything there.”
Chuck Grassley (Iowa): “There was no quid pro quo, you’d have to have that if there was going to be anything wrong.”
Roger Wicker (Miss.): “Nothing impeachable … it’s just a huge overreach.”
Jim Inhofe (Okla.): “This happens every day.”
James Lankford (Okla.): “The phone call the president made public immediately, that came out right away … We’ll wait and see. I don’t see anyone changing their mind at this point.”
David Perdue (Ga.): “This is a partisan sham trial and nothing more.”
Rand Paul (Ky.): “Making foreign aid contingent on behavior is actually the defining reason that countries supposedly give aid — to influence the behavior of the receiving country.”
Mike Braun (Ind.): “If you read the transcript closely there is no quid pro quo. I looked at it and I thought surely there had to be more in there to invest this much time and energy.”
Richard Burr (N.C.): “I’ve read the transcript. Is that a high crimes and misdemeanors ― the conversation that went on? I don’t see it.”
Thom Tillis (N.C.): “This is yet another pathetic attempt by Democrats to destroy President Trump with falsehoods to overturn the results of the 2016 election.”
Mike Lee (Utah): The call is not “a problem” and it “certainly doesn’t serve as the basis for impeaching and removing” Trump.
Tom Cotton (Ark.): Trump’s conversation with Zelensky was “a routine diplomatic phone call.”
Rick Scott (Fla.): “I still don’t see what the crime is. I keep saying, ‘Show me what the crime is.’ No one ever says that. They say he shouldn’t have done it. Well, all of us would do things differently than other people would do it, but if we’re going to impeach somebody, there ought to be something they did wrong.”
John Hoeven (N.D.): “U.S. Ambassador to the EU Sondland, in (released) text messages, said that President Trump did not want any quid pro quo.”
Shelley Moore Capito (W.Va.): “I don’t see a quid pro quo in here. I see a conversation between two leaders that is pretty broad-ranging. I just don’t think this rises to impeachable on the conversations I’ve read.”
Mike Rounds (S.D.): “After reading the transcript of the phone call between the president and President Zelensky, I do not believe the president committed an impeachable offense.”
Marsha Blackburn (Tenn.): “The Democrats want this to be a Kavanaugh circus … I got your back, @realDonald Trump.”
Josh Hawley (Mo.): “I looked at the transcript of the president’s call and don’t see any threat regarding US funding about anything. No quid pro quo.”
Bill Cassidy (La.): “Nothing in the transcript supports Democrats’ accusation that there was a quid pro quo.”
Jim Risch (Idaho): “Everybody should read that minute by minute, and it will demonstrate the hostility and vitriol that the national media has for the president.”
Deb Fischer (Neb.): “I read the full unredacted transcript of President Trump’s phone call with the Ukrainian president and, contrary what we were led to believe, there was no ‘smoking gun.’”
Cindy Hyde-Smith (Miss.): “This is how they operate. Verdict first, trial later. Break the rules. Ignore due process.”
John Barrasso (Wyo.): “They didn’t get what they wanted out of the Mueller investigation. They’re hoping they have something here. I just don’t see it.”
