McConnell's duplicitous legacy

[Tom Rinaldo]

7. The man is cunning. He left himsef an eye of a needle to squeeze through

He implied that if Democrats could have impeached Trump about a week earlier than they did, he would have allowed a trial to convene. The fig leaf he chose to stand on is that it is not enough to impeach a President while he is still in office, that it is not enough to begin a Senate trial while a President is still in office, but that the Senate must be able to finish a Senate trial while a President is still in office, because as soon as the President's term in office expires the trail proceedings immediately become null and void because s/he is no longer subject to removal. He made the case that the House did not provide sufficient time, after impeachment, to conduct a Senate trial even had one begun while Trump was still in office, hence he did not convene the Senate.

Do I believe he actually believes what he said? No.