Just one Republican senator that voted to convict President Donald Trump on Saturday has to face voters next year. But she does not seem to care about the political fallout.

“If I can't say what I believe that our president should stand for, then why should I ask Alaskans to stand with me?” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) in a lengthy interview after she joined six other Republicans to convict Trump. “This was consequential on many levels, but I cannot allow the significance of my vote, to be devalued by whether or not I feel that this is helpful for my political ambitions.”

Trump won Alaska by 10 points in 2020, a sign that many in the state will be upset about her vote. But Murkowski’s political strength has proven surprisingly durable, and she famously won a write-in campaign after losing a primary in 2010 to conservative candidate Joe Miller.

But the reaction from pro-Trump activists could be volcanic this time around, given that she’s the only Republican with immediate political risks ahead of her that voted to convict Trump of inciting an insurrection at the Capitol. She said she’s “sure that there are many Alaskans that are very dissatisfied with my vote, and I'm sure that there are many Alaskans that are proud of my vote.”

The moderate Republican also voted against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in 2018, considered convicting Trump in 2020 and bristled at her party’s moves to confirm Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court before the November election last fall. Yet since the Jan. 6 invasion of the Capitol by pro-Trump rioters, Murkowski telegraphed her potential conviction vote by imploring Trump to resign.

As she entered her Capitol hideaway to finish her official statement on her vote to convict Trump, she gestured at where there had been trash and broken glass from rioters that desecrated the building and recalled the sound of a police officer “retching” because he’d been sprayed with pepper spray. She said what made her “soul happy” on Saturday was the memory that Congress finished certifying the election later that day.

“We did it because we had some extraordinary men and women that were willing to stand up and defend and protect. And that was good,” she said. “I just wish that Donald Trump had been one of them.”

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell told GOP colleagues in a letter that he will vote to acquit Donald Trump in the former president's impeachment trial, according to sources familiar with the communication.

McConnell's announcement ends a long period of silence over whether he would consider convicting Trump for incitement of insurrection and could pave the way for many other Republicans to follow in acquittal. The Kentuckian shared his decision in a note to fellow GOP senators on Saturday morning, ahead of what could be the final day of Trump’s second impeachment trial.

“While a close call, I am persuaded that impeachments are a tool primarily of removal and we therefore lack jurisdiction,” McConnell wrote.

That position puts McConnell in line with the votes he and 43 other GOP senators already cast, declaring Trump’s second trial unconstitutional. But the Republican leader, who has not spoken to Trump for weeks, suggested that criminal prosecution of the former president could be appropriate as a remedy following the violent Jan. 6 insurrection at the Capitol.

“The Constitution makes it perfectly clear that Presidential criminal misconduct while in office can be prosecuted after the President has left office, which in my view alleviates the otherwise troubling ‘January exception’ argument raised by the House,” McConnell wrote to fellow Republicans.

McConnell is not whipping colleagues on their votes, but the decision of the GOP leader to acquit Trump will certainly tamp down the number of "yes" votes. As many as 10 senators were thought to be considering a conviction vote as of Friday, but it's become harder and harder to see many senators convicting Trump other than the six who have voted to proceed.

Sens. Bill Cassidy of Louisiana, Susan Collins of Maine, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, Pat Toomey of Pennsylvania, Ben Sasse of Nebraska and Mitt Romney of Utah voted that the trial is constitutional.

"Based on his comments over the past two months I really had no idea what he was going to do," said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), a member of the GOP leadership team. “He said everybody should make this decision and their own and I guess he thought that that would apply to him as well."

McConnell has held his decision close throughout the trial, until Saturday, and said in his email that he continues to view the verdict as a “vote of conscience” but shared his choice because his colleagues have been directly asking how he’ll vote.

The Senate could take its final trial vote as soon as Saturday, although a burgeoning debate among Democrats over whether to make an eleventh-hour push for witnesses may yet prolong the proceedings.

Marianne LeVine contributed to this report.

Bill Cassidy pulled back from a political gamble four years ago. Now he's taken the riskiest bet of his career.

The second-term senator shocked his colleagues and Louisiana Republicans by voting to move forward with President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial as he trashed Trump’s legal team for doing a “terrible job" in its opening argument. While few of his colleagues would criticize Cassidy directly, the Louisiana GOP immediately said it was “profoundly disappointed” in him and praised his colleague, Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.), for making the “right decision.”

Not long after, the local party in his hometown of Baton Rouge said Cassidy’s vote “was a betrayal of the people of Louisiana and a rebuke to those who supported President Trump.” It censured Cassidy and “holds him out as an object of shame.” One Louisiana Republican official expected more such condemnations to come.

“Republican voters realize this is not healing, it’s not unifying, it’s vindictive and divisive. And they’d prefer we move on,” said Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.). He said Cassidy’s move surprised him: “That’s his decision and he has to evaluate what he’s doing.”

Cassidy, a doctor who treated uninsured patients for years in the state’s charity health care system, evaded easy typecasting during the Trump era. He’s not a loyalist like Lindsey Graham or Rand Paul. Nor is he a frequent critic of the ex-president like Mitt Romney or Bob Corker. But he's a reliable conservative vote, close to party leaders.

On Wednesday, Louisiana local radio host Moon Griffon heard from callers frustrated with “Psycho Bill” and said Cassidy “just knifed us all in the back.” Cassidy explained his thinking on Wednesday as his position came under scrutiny: “It is Constitution and country over party. For some, they get it. And others aren’t quite so sure.”

“I don't usually do a poll before I take my vote. The vote I took is the conservative constitutional position,” he said.

He was subsequently praised by former Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.): "Many people in Louisiana are proud of him, including me." But Cassidy’s experience this week is a sign of what’s to come for Republicans who vote to convict the president in the coming days.

Of the six GOP senators to support moving forward with the trial, only Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) will face voters next year — and she’s won re-election after losing her primary before. Cassidy just won a six-year term himself.

“It’s fraught with political consequence,” said Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), the GOP whip. Thune faced retribution from Trump simply for opposing the former president’s efforts to overturn the election. He voted to find the trial unconstitutional but said the vivid presentation of videos of the Capitol insurrection was effective by House impeachment managers.

In fact on the most important question thus far, 44 GOP senators sided with Trump, a healthy margin that signals Trump may still easily avoid conviction and the possibility of being barred from running again in 2024. Republicans said there were few signs that others would follow Cassidy’s lead and defect from the president’s side when it comes down to the final vote.

“If you don’t think there’s jurisdiction, I don’t know how you vote to convict,” said Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), a constitutional lawyer who challenged some state’s election results last month.

In 2017, Cassidy was a leading player in the party’s efforts to repeal the Affordable Care Act. Cassidy initially pushed his party to pass the so-called “Jimmy Kimmel” test and not deny coverage for pre-existing conditions. That alliance with the talk show host ended with Kimmel calling Cassidy a liar and asserting he abandoned his commitment. But Cassidy stayed in Trump’s good graces as he worked with the president on health care reform, though the party’s effort eventually sputtered.

“You are doing an outstanding job representing the people of Louisiana & the U.S.A. You have my Complete and Total Endorsement!” Trump tweeted in March, endorsing Cassidy. The senator won reelection by 40 points in November.

Trump probably doesn’t feel that way these days, though it’s been more difficult to tell if Trump is angry at GOP senators after his Twitter account was shut down. But Trump’s followers are doing much of the work for him.

There’s a clear undercurrent in the party to punish Republicans who cross the president, in either his trial in the Senate or on the impeachment articles in the House. Rep. Liz Cheney (R-Wyo.) was censured by her state party, Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) is facing similar punishment, and Cassidy is now in his party’s bad graces.

“I’ve been doing a lot of phone calls to donors. Most people that I talk to have moved on,” said National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Rick Scott (R-Fla.) about Trump’s trial.

Rep. Mike Johnson (R-La.) said he was receiving lots of calls about Cassidy’s vote — though that will likely die down if Cassidy votes to acquit Trump. Cassidy hasn’t signaled where he will fall on the final trial vote, but his acknowledgment that the House managers convinced him that the trial was constitutional suggests he is persuadable.

“This does not predict my vote or anything else,” Cassidy told reporters on Wednesday. “It does predict that I will listen to these arguments as I did to the arguments yesterday, with an open mind.”

Meanwhile, he has some defenders back home. "The real offense some folks are seeking to punish is that Sen. Cassidy is acting insufficiently loyal to one man. One man. And if that’s the case, it strikes me as the opposite of what it means to be a Republican," said Michael DiResto, a member of Louisiana's Republican State Central Committee.

Generally an ally for GOP leaders in both the House and Senate, Cassidy has shown a desire for a more bipartisan direction since November. He joined a bipartisan group of senators pushing for a coronavirus aid deal and has stumped for money for states and localities — not exactly a popular position among conservatives. He also was among the first senators to meet with President Joe Biden at the White House.

He even gave an early hint that he might vote to advance Trump’s trial after voting to find the proceeding unconstitutional just a couple weeks ago. During a “Meet the Press” appearance on Sunday, Cassidy's colleagues noticed him arguing that the Senate's first vote on the constitutionality of Trump's trial included no debate time — while Tuesday's vote actually allowed the House Democratic managers and Trump’s lawyers to make their case.

That interview “kind of set the stage for being amenable,” said Sen. Mike Braun (R-Ind.). “You’ve got to take into consideration what your own point of view is as well as that of your constituents … he obviously was weighing those two.”

Of course, the blowback that Cassidy received is only a fraction of what might greet someone in a deep red state who votes to convict Trump. And he’s giving little away about how he sees the final verdict on a former president he voted to acquit in the first impeachment trial, just a year ago.

“I can’t begin to predict where he would be on the merits," said Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah).

Olivia Beavers contributed to this report.

Here’s how fragile Democrats’ Senate majority is: The brief Tuesday hospitalization of Senate pro tem Patrick Leahy prompted nearly everyone in the Capitol to research Vermont’s Senate vacancy laws, just in case.

Leahy (D-Vt.), who has served in the Senate since 1975, returned to work on Wednesday seemingly unscathed. The most senior Democratic senator said he was given a “clean bill of health” after being briefly hospitalized on Tuesday evening after suffering muscle spasms. The 80-year-old Democrat also indicated he's cleared to perform his normal duties

But just the possibility of Leahy missing a day of work sent a jolt through an evenly divided Senate, which Democrats control with just Vice President Kamala Harris’s tiebreaking vote. Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), the party’s chief vote-counter, immediately dialed up Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) on Tuesday evening when he heard about Leahy’s condition.

“You consider all the possibilities. And thank goodness none of them you have to worry about today. He’s doing just great,” Durbin said on Wednesday of Leahy. He acknowledged the health, well-being and simple attendance of his members is about to be a daily headache: “You bet it is. It’s not just who’s well but who is present.”

The gruff-voiced Leahy insisted that “of course” he will serve the rest of his term for a state controlled by a GOP governor who has previously vowed to fill a Senate vacancy with another member of the Democratic Caucus. Leahy didn’t rule out running again in 2022 for a ninth-term either and said "the latest polls show me winning easily."

But even his brief hospitalization is a reminder of how tenuous everything is for Schumer and his 49 members. A long-term absence, unexpected health issue amid a global pandemic or a sudden retirement could hobble his majority at any moment. And in a Senate filled with members in their 70s and 80s, it’s always a possibility that one member’s health could affect the balance of power.

“I’m glad he’s back. But it’s also a reminder than in an equally divided Senate how quickly things can change,” said Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas). He said vacancies could be filled, but a Democrat who was absent for any number of days could shift the balance of power back to Republicans.

“If someone was merely disabled but didn’t resign, then that would have that potential,” Cornyn added.

Former Sens. Johnny Isakson (R-Ga.), who was diagnosed with Parkinson’s, and Thad Cochran (R-Miss.), whose health had declined, retired early before serving their full terms in recent years. Before that, 89-year-old Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) and 88-year-old Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) died in office in 2013 and 2012, respectively. Isakson’s retirement eventually to led a Democratic pick-up, while Lautenberg’s death briefly gave Republicans his seat until Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) won a special election.

Leahy said he’s experienced muscle spasms before, but when they didn’t go away he sought medical attention from the Capitol physician Brian Monahan. Monahan said out of caution that "there's so much going on let's not take a chance and I went to the hospital on the way home," Leahy recalled.

Leahy's office promptly reported the incident to the media in a press release on Tuesday evening. Despite his good humor, Leahy himself didn’t seem especially excited about talking about his health, and after a few questions an aide directed him toward his Capitol office.

“I had some muscle spasms. And normally I would have said ‘to hell with it, to heck with it,’ but they didn't stop,” Leahy said. “I'm never comfortable talking about health matters.”

Leahy is one of the most integral parts of the Senate Democrats’ threadbare new majority in a tied Senate. He’s expected to soon assume the chairmanship of the Senate Appropriations Committee, is third in line for the presidential succession and is also slated to oversee what may be a grueling impeachment trial.

Though he's served in the Senate now for eight terms, Durbin said Leahy hasn’t lost a step. Moreover, there are four senators older than Leahy: Democrat Dianne Feinstein of California and Republicans Chuck Grassley of Iowa are both 87. Richard Shelby of Alabama and Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma are 86 years old. After Leahy, his Vermont colleague Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is next in age at 79.

Questions also come up about the ability of some aging senators to carry out their duties. Feinstein, the oldest member of the Senate, stepped down as the top Democrat on the Judiciary Committee in November after progressives criticized her handling of Amy Coney Barrett's confirmation to the Supreme Court.

The threat of coronavirus is another issue that's scrambled the Senate's calendar, forcing GOP Leader Mitch McConnell to cut some days off the schedule last year after some of his members tested positive. Ultimately, however, he pushed forward after those diagnoses to confirm Barrett right before the election.

Each state has its own vacancy laws — and in Vermont any vacancy would be filled within six months by a special election. When Sanders was under consideration for a Biden Cabinet seat, GOP Gov. Phil Scott said he would probably appoint a short-term replacement to caucus with Schumer.

“Sen. Sanders has caucused with the Democrats,” Scott said last year, adding he would consider “a more left-leaning type of independent that would obviously caucus with the Democrats."

Forgetting all that, Leahy said he feels good enough to consider another run for office, though he said he wouldn’t consider that until next winter. Known for snapping photos of Capitol denizens and showcasing a dry sense of humor, Leahy feigned surprise when asked about having to decide whether to pursue a ninth term: “I might better start checking in to this."

“You all know this, I never make up my mind until November or December the year before and I'm not going to now. Usually when we start skiing and snowshoeing then we talk about it,” he said.

Ohio Republican Rob Portman will not seek a third Senate term in 2022, a blow to both Republicans’ hopes of taking back the Senate and the chamber’s dwindling number of centrists.

The two-term senator is one of the most effective legislators in the Senate, using his relationships gleaned from a long career in Washington to find compromise. But he cited legislative paralysis in the Senate as a major factor in his decision to retire at the end of next year.

"It has gotten harder and harder to break through the partisan gridlock and make progress on substantive policy, and that has contributed to my decision," he said in a statement.

Portman joins Sens. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) and Richard Burr (R-N.C.) in retirement next year in key swing states. Democrats currently hold a narrow majority in an evenly split Senate due to Vice President Kamala Harris’s tie-breaking vote.

Portman easily won reelection in 2016 alongside former President Donald Trump, but could not be a more different politician. A low-key GOP operator, Portman was never fully comfortable defending Trump’s bombastic political attacks. Portman said in an interview in November he was planning on running in 2022. But the GOP is now undergoing a major reckoning after Trump's attacks on the election inspired an attack on the Capitol by his supporters.

Particularly now that he is unbound from having to run in a GOP primary, Portman is a key vote to watch in the coming weeks as the Senate prepares for Trump’s second impeachment trial. Portman voted to acquit Trump last year but criticized his behavior pressuring Ukraine to investigate political rivals as “not appropriate.”

The mild-mannered GOP senator is a key part of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell's caucus. He attends McConnell's leadership meetings and is one of the party's best fundraisers. He's also a social moderate and was one of the first Republicans to endorse gay marriage.

"Both the Republican conference and the institution as a whole will be worse off when Rob departs," McConnell said in a statement.

His decision to retire will also focus Republican retention efforts on ensuring GOP Sens. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Roy Blunt of Missouri run for reelection. Johnson and Grassley, 87, are undecided and Blunt said he's doing all the things he needs to do to run.

Portman said he announced his decision to allow state Republicans time to prepare campaigns to succeed him in what will be a brutal Senate race. And an open GOP primary to succeed him will be key to the Republican Party’s directions after Trump’s defeat. Trump is popular in Ohio, but it is still a swing state in Senate races. Progressive Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) won reelection in 2018 fairly easily.

The Republican primary could quickly become crowded and nasty, especially as the party works to rebuild itself and figure out the path forward in the wake of Trump's defeat. A number of Republicans could be in the mix. Rep. Jim Jordan, a close Trump ally, has previously been eyed as a potential statewide candidate.

Several Republicans also pointed to former Ohio treasurer Josh Mandel as a potential candidate. Mandel lost to Brown in 2012, and dropped out of the 2018 race against him because of family health issues, but still has $4.3 million left over in his campaign account. J.D. Vance, the author of the book Hillbilly Elegy, considered running for Senate in 2018 and is a potential contender next year. Rep. Steve Stivers, who ran his party's House campaign committee in 2018, is considering a run, according to a source familiar with his plans.

Lt. Gov. Jon Husted, a Republican, in a statement thanked Portman and said he would talk with his family, the outgoing senator and Gov. Mike DeWine "before discussing the future." Several Republicans also mentioned former Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-Ohio) as a contender given his fundraising prowess and campaign war chest.

Other statewide officials could be in the mix, including Secretary of State Frank LaRose. Jon Keeling, a spokesperson for LaRose, in a statement touted the success of the 2020 election in Ohio and noted that the filing deadline is a year away, saying LaRose's "focus right now is on finding ways to improve upon Ohio’s success so we can continue to thrive as a national model long into the future."

On the Democratic side, there are several potential candidates, including Rep. Tim Ryan, who has long considered statewide bids but declined in the past to run, and Nan Whaley, the mayor of Dayton. David Pepper, the former state party chair, is also a potential contender. The race against DeWine had been the focus of Democrats in Ohio for 2022, but the Senate seat being open could cause some reconsideration.

Ryan got out the gate quickly with a fundraising email about Portman's decision, calling Ohio the "center of the political map in 2022" and soliciting feedback on the news. Nina Turner, an ally of progressive Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), said she will stick to her plans to run for a vacant House seat.

Despite announcing his retirement, Portman will be plenty busy his last two years, as the top Republican on the Senate Homeland Security Committee as well as a member in a bipartisan coalition working on the next coronavirus relief bill.

“Over the next two years, I look forward to being able to focus all my energy on legislation and the challenges our country faces rather than on fundraising and campaigning,” Portman said. He predicted he would have won reelection but said he decided against spending another six years in the Senate — and Washington.

And Portman has now served at nearly every level of government. He served in the House, as former President George W. Bush’s budget director and trade representative and two terms in the Senate. He was also discussed as a potential presidential candidate in the past.

Brown, who has served with Portman in the chamber for the past decade, thanked him for his public service in a statement.

“Rob and I have worked together on issues that matter to Ohioans, from protecting the health of Lake Erie, to better enforcing our trade laws, to helping Ohioans who are struggling with addiction," Brown said. "We’ve not always agreed with one another, but we’ve always been able to put our differences aside to do what’s best for our state."

Senate Republicans vowed Thursday that President Joe Biden’s coronavirus relief bill will not get 60 votes, daring the White House to either compromise with the GOP or use partisan procedural tactics to evade their filibuster.

Put simply, the Senate GOP says Biden’s proposal spends too much money and comes too soon on the heels of Congress’ $900 billion stimulus package from last month. And that unless the proposal has major changes made to it or Democrats use budget reconciliation to pass it with a simple majority, it is doomed on the Senate floor.

“I don’t think it can get 60. Because even the people on our side that would be inclined to want to work with the administration on something like that, that price range is going to be out of range for them,” said Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-S.D,) the party’s chief vote counter. “Absent some change and economic conditions, etc., I think that would be a very heavy lift.”

The early opposition from Republicans signals that the next round of coronavirus relief will be at least as painful as the last, which took more than six months to clinch in late December. It also means Biden may have to choose between lowering his ambitions in order to follow through on his bipartisan desires or embracing a partisan bill that he says the country desperately needs.

Some House Democrats have mulled a smaller package that links vaccines and larger stimulus checks, although Democratic leaders in both chambers have yet to decide on a path forward.

Biden has pushed a massive plan that includes a $15 an hour minimum wage hike, further boosts in unemployment benefits and $1,400 in direct payments. It also pumps more money into vaccines and testing.

Some of those items can get support from Republicans. But that package as a whole is a “non-starter,” said Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), the No. 4 GOP leader.

“We’re ready to look at what it takes to move forward, as effectively and quickly as we can, on vaccine distribution, on securing what we need for the future in terms of CDC,” Blunt said. “There’s some things in there that aren’t going to happen, there’s some things that can happen.”

Even progressives prefer to work with Republicans instead of using reconciliation or changing the Senate’s filibuster rules to ram the relief package through. But they say they will not be stymied by Republicans’ use of the supermajority requirement in getting things done.

“The American people are crying out for help, crying out for action and we’ve got to respond,” said Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.). “I hope we can get cooperation of our Republican colleagues and that they understand the severity of what’s facing the country. But we need all the tools that we have.”

Sanders is chairman of the Senate Budget Committee, which could set the stage for using the procedural tool to skirt a GOP filibuster. Using budget reconciliation, Democrats can pass legislation with just 50 votes and Vice President Kamala Harris breaking any tie. Still, there are some limits to budget reconciliation — and Biden’s big pitch is that he can unite the country and work with Republicans.

There are few takers among Republicans, however, to go as big and bold as Biden wants. And there’s even less enthusiasm to do it now. Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Mitt Romney of Utah, two Republicans that helped marshal the last bipartisan bill into law, both indicated this week that Biden would have to sell them on passing such a large bill now.

“They have to know this is not going to get anywhere,” said Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) of the Biden administration. “It goes nowhere. No, it cannot get 60 votes.”

The Biden administration says the exact opposite is true. In a press briefing on Thursday afternoon, White House press secretary Jen Psaki said that Biden “feels that package is designed for bipartisan support.” Also, some business groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have endorsed his plan.

Collins and Romney are among a group of 16 senators in both parties set to meet with the Biden administration over the weekend to begin discussing economic issues. It’s just the start of what’s likely to be a long set of talks with the Senate, which is split 50-50 and will take weeks to confirm Biden’s Cabinet and conduct former President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial before being able to fully turn to Covid relief.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has listed an aid package as among the Senate's top three priorities, alongside confirmations and the impeachment trial. On Thursday he said his new majority has to confront “the greatest economic crisis since the New Deal 75 years ago, the greatest health crisis in 100 years.”

He and Biden also have to confront a recalcitrant Republican Party that thinks it has already spent too much money.

“We’ve already given $5 trillion,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.). “It’s too high. It’s too vague ... I don’t want to just throw money out there.”

Some Democrats acknowledge what Biden is presenting will not be embraced by the Republican Party and say his proposal is just the first step toward an eventual compromise with the GOP. The alternative is to scrap efforts at bipartisanship and try and pass Biden’s first legislative agenda item unilaterally, which could always be a fallback plan.

“Some of the elements will draw very strong bipartisan support,” said Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), a close Biden ally. “What we need to do is just work hard to find a good principled compromise.”

Matthew Choi contributed to this report.

Senate leaders Chuck Schumer and Mitch McConnell have yet to strike an agreement on how to run an evenly split Senate. And McConnell is driving a hard bargain.

In a letter to colleagues, McConnell indicated he wants a commitment from Schumer (D-N.Y.) to preserve the legislative filibuster as part of their agreement governing the rules of the 50-50 Senate. He said while he is taking his cues from the last split Senate in 2001, he also believes "we need to also address the threats to the legislative filibuster."

"The time is ripe to address this issue head on before the passions of one particular issue or another arise," McConnell said. "A delay in reaching an agreement could delay the final determination of committee assignments but it is important to maintain the status quo on the legislative filibuster."

The two leaders met for about a half-hour on Tuesday in McConnell's office, during his last day as majority leader. There was no apparent resolution afterward; Schumer told reporters that "we discussed a whole lot of issues." Schumer declined to comment on the future of the legislative filibuster, but a spokesperson threw cold water on addressing it in an organizing resolution.

"Leader Schumer expressed that the fairest, most reasonable and easiest path forward is to adopt the 2001 bipartisan agreement without extraneous changes from either side," the spokesperson said. The spokesperson said that Schumer and McConnell had made progress on confirming Biden's nominees and holding a "fair impeachment trial" for outgoing President Donald Trump.

McConnell’s spokesman Doug Andres later Tuesday night said in a statement that “McConnell expressed his long-held view that the crucial, longstanding, and bipartisan Senate rules concerning the legislative filibuster remain intact, specifically during the power share for the next two years. Discussions on all aspects of the power-sharing agreement will continue over the next several days.”

It could be days before there's a resolution between Schumer and McConnell on how the Senate will operate. And a protracted standoff will result in a bizarre Senate stasis where it will take agreement of 100 senators to do much of anything, particularly confirming Biden's Cabinet.

Republicans will even still control majorities on some committees, since new senators haven't been added to those panels and the two leaders haven't hammered out committee ratios. All that could change with unanimous consent from senators, or an agreement from the two leaders.

In his letter to GOP colleagues, McConnell said he hoped the House would wait until at least Thursday to send the impeachment articles for Trump's Senate trial to allow the inauguration to take place on Wednesday without the trial clouding it. He also said his party will resume in-person party lunches next week. The letter was first reported by National Review.

Schumer will formally become majority leader on Wednesday afternoon, wielding an effective 51-50 majority after his new Democratic senators are sworn in and Kamala Harris becomes vice president and Senate tie-breaker, according to a source familiar with the schedule.

Schumer told reporters earlier on Tuesday that “we hope we can come to an agreement" with McConnell. McConnell is currently the majority leader and will still have major sway over incoming President Joe Biden’s agenda, particularly as long as the legislative filibuster is around.

“They’re both pragmatists in that they have to get this done for us to move forward. I think they will. I don’t get the sense McConnell is going to hold out for weeks or anything like that,” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), who attends GOP leadership meetings with McConnell.

“Given what we’ve been through as a country: a pandemic, and an attempted coup, this relationship simply has to work,” added Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), who helps run the party’s whip operation. “The normal political calculus about maximizing advantage in the next election has to be set aside.”

But the filibuster could be a big challenge. Schumer would be giving away much of his leverage early on if he bowed to McConnell's hopes of enshrining official protections for the supermajority requirement.

Currently most legislation requires 60 votes, meaning at least 10 Republicans would have to work with Democrats on most bills. If Democrats grow frustrated with a McConnell-led blockade, Schumer could in theory get all his members to get rid of that rule with a vice presidential tie-break.

Some Democrats have said they will not vote to change the rules, though Republicans may want an ironclad commitment. Democrats would view any agreement on preserving the filibuster as a departure from past precedent of operating an evenly split Senate.

Schumer (D-N.Y.) and McConnell (R-Ky.) are largely expected to run the Senate in a similar fashion to how former Senate leaders Trent Lott and Tom Daschle devised the last 50-50 blueprint in 2001. That allowed for committee memberships to be evenly split, with bills that receive tied votes advancing to the floor; the party controlling the White House would still set the Senate schedule and determine which legislation would get taken up.

But there’s so much to be negotiated this time around beyond just the operations of the Senate. Among the unanswered questions: When will President Donald Trump’s impeachment trial start and how long will it go?

Speaker Nancy Pelosi and other top Democrats have been tight lipped about planning for the trial, including when they plan to transit the impeachment article to the Senate. Democratic aides have said they don’t expect an announcement until Thursday at the earliest, not wanting to distract from the inauguration on Wednesday. Democrats also said trial timing is determined more by the power sharing agreement Schumer and McConnell reach than when the House transmits the article.

It's also unclear whether Biden gets any of his Cabinet nominees confirmed before or during the trial, though Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said he will prevent Biden's Homeland Security chief from being confirmed on Wednesday. And Democrats are also eager to learn whether Republicans will work with them on a Covid-19 relief package before they decide to move unilaterally.

“Obviously there’s a lot of suspicion and doubt on our side given the history of McConnell in the minority under the Obama administration. A lot of reasons for skepticism and cynicism,” said Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.). “It should be a reset moment for all of us. Not just Schumer and McConnell.”

Rank-and-file senators were largely in the dark on how close — or far — the two leaders are from cutting a deal on all those critical items. Schumer said bluntly: “We’ve got three things we’ve got to do quickly, impeachment, nomination, Covid.”

In a Senate speech on Tuesday afternoon, McConnell said the "marching orders from the American people are clear. We're to have a robust discussion and seek common ground."

And senators are eager to see how that all shakes out at a historic time, with an outgoing president’s impeachment trial set to start amid a devastating pandemic and an evenly divided upper chamber.

“It’s gonna be interesting. We’ll just have to wait and see. People are excited about getting going,” said Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.), who was among the eight Republicans who objected to certification of Biden’s Electoral College win in two states hours after the pro-Trump riot. “Everybody’s kind of excited about putting it all behind us and going forward.”

Heather Caygle and Marianne LeVine contributed to this report.

An impeachment trial is looming, and the Senate majority is set to change hands in the next couple days. But when the dust settles after Joe Biden’s inauguration as president, Democrats are hoping he won’t have a totally bare Cabinet.

Senior Democrats are optimistic that Biden will see at least two of his top national security officials confirmed either on Inauguration Day or shortly thereafter, particularly after the pro-Trump siege of the Capitol last week by rioters and extremists. That would allow Biden to at least claim equal treatment to President Donald Trump, who had his Homeland Security and Defense secretaries confirmed on Inauguration Day, followed days later by his CIA director.

Democrats also hope to make Janet Yellen the new Treasury secretary and Tony Blinken the new secretary of State in the coming days. But they say the minimum bar should be confirming Alejandro Mayorkas to the Department of Homeland Security and retired Gen. Lloyd Austin to the Defense Department to beef up national security.

“Obviously we need a Department of the Treasury and other key positions, certainly. But in terms of the security of the country, there’s a great sense of urgency,” said Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), the No. 4 Democratic leader, in an interview on Monday afternoon. Republicans “should absolutely be working with us to do at minimum, the confirmations that we supported for President Trump.”

Mayorkas, Austin, Blinken, Yellen and Director of National Intelligence nominee Avril Haines all have hearings on Tuesday. Haines is another prospect for quick confirmation given the politics and mood in Congress about the security breach in the Capitol.

“I would hope that our Republican colleagues would join us in putting the secretary of Defense, secretary of Homeland Security, secretary of State, attorney general and others in office ASAP,” Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer said on Sunday. “When President Trump was president on the first day, both Defense and Homeland Security were put into office. We Democrats supported that happening, we need cooperation.”

In the Senate, any one senator can object to quick votes. When Schumer becomes majority leader, he can force votes himself on Cabinet nominees, but each would take several days. Democrats can confirm nominees in the Senate unilaterally once they have the majority.

While Austin is popular in both parties, his confirmation is more difficult because he needs a waiver to serve as Defense secretary since he has not been out of the military for the minimum of seven years. The House must pass that waiver before he can be confirmed, and Democratic leaders there say it’s a top priority.

“The internal security threat the U.S. faces right now is serious. We need a Secretary of Defense on the job immediately,” tweeted Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who explained he voted against Mattis’ waiver but supports Austin’s because there’s “simply much less reason to be fearful of a recently retired general running DoD under Biden.”

Confirmation of any Cabinet officials could be tough on Inauguration Day for a variety of factors. Three new Democratic senators, Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock of Georgia plus Alex Padilla of California, must be sworn in. And Kamala Harris must be the vice president to give Democrats a 50-seat majority with Harris breaking ties. All those events should be official by late Wednesday or Thursday.

Moreover, the committees and the overall Senate must be organized by Schumer and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell. Those negotiations are ongoing, though they will likely follow much of the precedent from the last 50-50 majority 20 years ago. And heightening the intrigue: Speaker Nancy Pelosi has yet to send Trump’s impeachment articles over to the Senate.

An impeachment trial could preempt other business unless McConnell and Schumer strike an agreement on a schedule for Biden’s confirmations and the trial. Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) said on MSNBC on Monday that he believed the impeachment trial would not start on Inauguration Day.

McConnell and Schumer have been in discussions for several days and remain in contact, said a source familiar with the matter. McConnell has said he would treat Biden's nominees much better than Schumer treated Trump’s, though Democrats remember McConnell not being especially kind to President Barack Obama's picks.

“So much of how we proceed is about whether or not Mitch McConnell is gonna want to help get the personnel in place for the security of the country and want to work with Chuck Schumer to move forward. Or will he take a position he has before with President Obama?" Stabenow said. “We don't know. And that makes a difference.”

Andrew Desiderio contributed to this report.

Senate Republicans talk as a party as many as three times a week during normal times. But these times are anything but normal.

The Senate GOP has not spoken as a conference for more than two weeks now, since Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell asked Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who wasn't present, to explain his plans to challenge the election in a party conference call. Since that Dec. 31 conversation, eight senators challenged the election results, the Capitol was overrun by pro-Donald Trump rioters and the president was impeached.

And while Republicans are at odds with Trump, it might not translate to the kind of bipartisan condemnation that an impeachment trial requires for conviction.

“There’s a lot of people upset. But the legal standard for inciting insurrection is going to be pretty hard to prove because his words matter. And his words were reckless and his words certainly had an impact on how fired up people were. But his words were also carefully selected,” said Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.). “If you’re going to take him at his word, his words were ‘protest peacefully and patriotically.’ I just think it’s a pretty hard standard to prove.”

Now, as McConnell’s conference prepares to enter minority status and faces another grueling impeachment trial, senators are largely being left without guidance from leadership over how to come down on Trump. The conference, so divided now over the outgoing president, is being given space to breathe, according to three senators who spoke on the condition of anonymity.

“He’s just letting the conference kind of cool down after the certification,” said one GOP senator of McConnell. With so much uncertainty about when the trial will start and handing power off to Democrats, “all we’d be doing is having the circular discussions, what ifs.”

Another senator said there’s been little member-to-member contact among the rank and file too as everyone processes the last two weeks, including the remote possibility of 17 GOP senators joining Democrats to convict the president of impeachment and prevent him from ever holding public office again.

And after McConnell helped lead the defense, coordinated with the White House and declared there was “no chance” of convicting Trump at the president’s trial just a year ago, the majority leader is keeping an open mind about whether to convict the president of “incitement of insurrection,” associates say. Other than a Dear Colleague letter he penned on Wednesday, there’s been little overall instruction from the current majority leader to his members.

It’s a stunning development for McConnell, going from a gung-ho acquittal quest last January to considering whether to convict the president after he’s left office. Trump’s approval ratings have also cratered in the wake of the deadly attack on the Capitol, with a Pew Research Center survey on Friday showing just a 29 percent approval rating. Such a number could make it easier for some in the GOP to turn on Trump ahead of the 2022 midterms.

“The way in which he acts between now and Wednesday will have bearing on what Republican senators do,” said Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) of Trump. Republicans “probably have some strategic decision to make about the future of their party. But I’ve learned to be disappointed by my Republican colleagues.”

Very few Senate Republicans have publicly made any statements about impeachment and many declined interviews this week. Many will say the trial is unconstitutional or impractical once Trump has left office.

“I’m skeptical because it’s irrelevant in so many respects. It’s distracting, it’s divisive and I just can’t imagine that an incoming administration wants to keep Donald Trump on the front page while they’re trying to fill their first 100 days with meaningful successes,” Cramer said.

It is notable, however, how few Republicans are defending Trump on the merits. And House Democrats managing the trial could create some goodwill with on-the-fence Republicans by keeping Trump’s second trial concise, easy to follow and bare bones, said one aide to a Republican senator.

Republicans are split into as many disparate factions as you could imagine. There’s Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who found that the House acted “appropriately” in impeaching the president. And Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.) declared Trump “committed impeachable offenses” though has not committed to convicting him. Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) is the only Senate Republican who voted to convict Trump last time around.

Meanwhile some Republicans argue that it’s not constitutional to hold a trial after Trump has left office, which is now the most likely result of the House’s impeachment trial. Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said that the Democrats have gone off the “deep end” in impeaching the president a second time.

“Should the president have said something faster to tell people not to, after they were [rioting], not to do it? Sure,” Scott said on Hugh Hewitt's show Thursday. “But did he tell people to go into the Capitol? Absolutely not.”

Scott was among the Republicans who challenged the election results, and some have highlighted their vote amid charges that they added fuel to Trump’s fire. Hawley has defended his role in an op-ed in his home state, while Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) did several interviews decrying the violence that occurred at the Capitol and saying that was never his goal.

Then there’s Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.), who initially joined the election challenge effort and was giving a speech about Arizona’s results when the Senate went into lockdown. He reversed course after the attack on the Capitol, withdrew his objections and even penned an op-ed apologizing for seeming to question Black voters in American cities.

“My intent to give a voice to Oklahomans who had questions was never also an intent to diminish the voice of any Black American,” Lankford said. “I should have recognized how what I said and what I did could be interpreted by many of you … I deeply regret my blindness to that perception, and for that I am sorry.”

With so many differing viewpoints of what has transpired, Republicans said there would be little utility to hashing things out over telephone ahead of a momentous week. In a rare move for the calculating McConnell, the two weeks between the attack on the Capitol and President-elect Joe Biden’s Inauguration have become a period of reflection — not of internal party strategy.

“There’s enough hard feelings out in the general public,” said the Republican senator. “If anyone has any within the conference, they’re not expressing them.”

Andrew Desiderio contributed to this report.

Forgive Bob Corker if he sounds like he’s going to say, “I told you so.”

The former senator was lonely as a Republican critic of President Donald Trump, beginning in 2017. While most GOP lawmakers kept quiet about their concerns, Corker warned the White House had become an “adult daycare” and that Trump’s Cabinet members “help separate our country from chaos.” He even held a hearing to scrutinize the president’s power to use nuclear weapons.

Corker retired rather than run for a third term in 2018 amid a feud with Trump and potentially tough primary. But after a flood of GOP condemnation of Trump for inciting a deadly riot at the Capitol, the Tennessee Republican says he’s been vindicated.

“Nobody's perfect. You don't ever have all of the information. But I think I’ve been validated,” said Corker. “My observations about his character and his conduct certainly have been validated, unfortunately, with people's lives being lost. And our country appearing to be run by a tin pot dictator to people around the world.”

Now with Trump on his way out and the GOP reckoning with Trumpism, Corker isn’t ruling out another run for office. He said that he has completed his self-imposed two-year sabbatical from public life, though his two terms in the Senate were enough to satisfy his desire to legislate.

His state's governorship is up in 2022, and obviously a wide-open presidential primary waits in 2024. Corker has never considered challenging Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee (R), according to a source familiar with his thinking.

"Republicans are going to have to have a real debate about who they are going to be," he said. "The Republican Party has been a party of adults, and people who make tough decisions. Obviously, that hasn't been the case in recent times."

Corker also sees a potential silver-lining to this week’s chaos. It was costly, Corker said, but now the president has been exposed in a way that will shrink his political influence permanently.

It allowed “his true character [to be] revealed in a way that hopefully will diminish his impact on our country in the future,” Corker said. “So that is the one plus that comes out of this. People have been able to see firsthand what all of us have known, just who he really is.”

Corker says he doesn’t regret his “last-second” vote for Trump in 2016 given the choice he had at the time between Trump and Hillary Clinton. He says he did not support Trump or Joe Biden in 2020, choosing to write in “someone who I thought had most fully represented, from my standpoint, the kind of person that I thought ought to be president.”

Corker has not been as outspoken over the last two years as former Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake, another Republican who criticized the president during the first two years of his administration. But both had something in common: the sense that they and the other handful of GOP Trump critics were outliers in their own party, particularly before Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) was elected as a stern counterweight to Trump. Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Ben Sasse (R-Neb.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) also kept their distance from Trump and were among the few Trump critics.

But after criticizing the president so directly, neither Corker nor Flake ran for reelection.

“There wasn’t any support whatsoever,” said Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who was one of the few Democrats that tried to work with Trump. “I give Bob credit for speaking out. Bob did speak out. And Bob tried to do the best he could from a very disadvantaged situation. Because Trump still had the support of the people.”

Corker was considered by Trump as a potential secretary of State and vice president, but withdrew from contention from vice presidential consideration and helped confirm former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson after Trump chose him to be his top diplomat. Corker praised Trump’s foreign policy instincts in late 2016.

The rift between Corker and Trump began in 2017 after Trump defended white supremacists rallying in Charlottesville, Va. From there the feud deepened into Trump attacking Corker as a “lightweight” and “incompetent” as chairman, and Corker contending that Trump could start “World War Three.”

In explaining his vote for Trump in 2016, Corker described an evolution of how he saw Trump the candidate compared to Trump the president. He said Trump at first seemed like a pro wrestling character telling people what they wanted to hear, but ended up as “a crude demagogue.” Of course, many saw Trump that way from the moment he lashed out at Mexican immigrants the day he declared his candidacy.

But Trump’s most damaging rhetoric is now certainly his post-election refusal to admit defeat, which few Republicans initially spoke out against. Many in the GOP took more than a month to acknowledge Biden’s win. Some only recognized Biden as the next president this month.

“You realize in a republic as mature as ours, you can still have someone like this who tells the public non-truths, [people] believe and follow him,” Corker said. “I wish there have been much greater pushback. I'm glad to see it taking place now.”

Corker had previously said he was was "saddened" after some senators, including Sens. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.), who succeeded him, and new Sen. Bill Hagerty (R-Tenn.) had a plan to "undermine democracy" by objecting to Biden's Electoral College win. But he praised Blackburn and Hagerty when they reversed course after the riot.

Most Democrats and some Republicans want to remove Trump from office now, whether it’s through impeachment or invoking the 25th Amendment. Echoing concerns Corker hinted at in his 2017 Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Speaker Nancy Pelosi has spoken to the military out of worry about Trump having the nuclear codes.

Even as a top Trump critic and someone who is currently not facing the prospect of a political campaign, Corker doesn’t think the president’s immediate ouster is necessary: “No military officer is going to carry out some crazy command that he might offer.”

“We’re at a weak moment in our country, and certainly foreign adversaries, if they wish to do something over the next 14 days we’re in a weakened place. I don't think that happens,” Corker said. “If we can somehow survive [until Jan. 20] without doing anything else that undercuts our nation, and undercuts our democracy, I think we’re better off just letting him ease on out of here. Never to return again.”