Depends on how you look at it. The fact he wasn't removed from office during the first impeachment when everyone knew or SHOULD have known he was a danger to this country, and we had to go to a historical second impeachment is kind of sad
This is horseshit.
Anyone with any intelligence knew the entire deal with that impeachment - you either believed he was investigating corruption in 2016, or getting dirt on a future political rival.
Either conclusion could be drawn from the statement depending on viewpoint.
However, that then puts it on the accuser to have clear, undeniable evidence to convict. The left didn't even come close. They even changed the charges from bribery mid impeachment because they KNEW they had nothing but heresay and conjecture.
So, if the Democrats knew they couldn't convict, what's the rational conclusion on why they tried?
Politics - simple politics.
Exactly what the founding fathers did NOT want impeachment to be.