In the meantime, Mitch McConnell has been sounding out the Senate GOP and coordinating with the White House. According to The Hill (via the NY Post), Trump impeachment: Senate GOP reportedly unites behind a no-witness trial, the Senate GOP and White House have come up with a grand unified strategy of sorts:
After weeks of behind-the-scenes debate, Senate Republicans have hit on their strategy for handling President Trump’s impeachment: a brief trial — with no witness testimony — and a fast acquittal.
“I’m ready to vote now,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Missouri) told The Hill. “I think the articles are a joke.”
But they don’t want to dismiss the House Democrats’ charges out of hand, as some Trump allies have proposed.
“It’s time for him to have his day in court,” Hawley said. “The president deserves to have due process.”
Trump, who was calling for a full-blown trial with multiple witnesses — including former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter — just three weeks ago, now supports the Senate leadership’s plan.
“The facts belie the allegation and the facts speak very strongly for themselves,” Eric Ueland, White House director of legislative affairs, said last week.
Of course, this may require a change in the Senate rules governing impeachment, to allow the Senate to begin without having had the articles "transmitted" by the House. That's if Pelosi remains obstinate.
The Hill's account provides lots more in the way of quotes from GOP senators offering their views, but the consensus has turned to: the shorter the better, but we want an acquittal, not a dismissal:
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said his goal is “to have as short a trial as possible.”
“I think there's a desire by senators, quite honestly, to get this chapter closed and moved forward,” Graham told reporters.
Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said that when it comes to a trial “shorter is better,” and that he thought his colleagues were coalescing behind that.
“I think shorter is better for lots of reasons,” Cramer said. “I think people are ready to move on.”
Republicans are also stressing though that they don’t want to simply dismiss the articles against Trump. The House voted earlier this month to impeach Trump on two counts: one charging him with abuse of power in his dealings with Ukraine and the second with obstructing Congress during its investigation of those actions.
“I’m ready to get this thing and get it done,” said Sen. David Perdue (R-Ga.). “It’s time for him to have his day in court. … I don’t want to a vote to dismiss. I want a vote to acquit. The president deserves to have due process.”
Graham, who previously advocated dismissing the articles, added that a “motion dismissed will not stand. … I don't want a motion to dismiss. I want a vote on the articles themselves.”
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who has emerged as a close ally of Trump’s, has floated trying to dismiss the article, including telling The Washington Post in November that he would make the motion “as soon as we possibly can.” A motion to dismiss would need 51 votes, and members of GOP leadership have suggested it would fall short.
Asked after the House impeachment vote if he still wanted to dismiss the articles instead of going through a trial, Paul sidestepped, telling The Hill that the “whole idea of the impeachment inquiry was ill-conceived … so I think the quicker it can be done the better.”
UPDATE: We previously discussed the House's motives in this rushed impeachment: The Rushed Impeachment--Now We Know Why. However, CTH has a nice reprise of the issue today, which they covered before: Anticipate House Impeachment Articles After January 3rd, 2020 – Oral Arguments for Mueller Grand Jury Material.