To say that any American has looked forward to the second impeachment of Mr. Trump is by far the most divisive statement politicians made to keep our country divided. On February 9, 2021, the country or, more likely the world, held their breath as the scenes from January 6, 2021, were replayed in a timeline that represents the second impeachment case of the former president.

Mr. Raskin presented a very emotionally compelling case. He spoke of his personal experience on that day, and he described a routine process that Mr. Raskin was proud to take part in. He acknowledged his daughter's fear of going to Washington because of the media's statement of a protest. Mr. Raskin like all members of Congress, and all of America, believed that the Capitol was one of the safest places they could be. He closed the opening statement with tears in his eyes because his twenty-four-year-old daughter told her father after he apologized for the incident and promised her it would never happen again, "Dad, I don't want to come back to the Capitol."

The cameras panned the senators sitting at their desks and many were wiping tears from their eyes, yet some still drinking the Kool-Aid of Trumpism were busy on their phones, reading papers, and trying as they might to not hear the pain that their leader has inflicted on their sacred ground.

Now what I have gleaned from this proceeding so far is the two ideologies are interpreting the Constitution. Even though the Democrats have always insisted the Constitution is a living document that has to grow with the times, the Republicans have always insisted the Constitution is set in stone and we must never revise it to meet any party's favor. The prosecution went along with that theory and went down their road of taking the literal words from the Constitution and making their argument. The defense started its opening statement admitting the prosecution has a compelling case.

Yet they went into their rhetoric with a lot of political "what about isms" and the meandering statement of Trump's attorney, Bruce Castor. Castor had a difficult time keeping on point, at one time trying to break the ice by describing how a record player works. His most damning statement was at the end as he offered up the option that Mr. Trump should be arrested and not impeached. That is the only statement I agreed with. Then his second attorney took the stage and David Schoen rambled on with a whole lot of "what about isms" and pointing at the Democrats not for fulfilling their Constitutional responsibility but their fear of running against Mr. Trump in 2024. That boys and girls are not only reprehensible it is absurd.

The few Republican Senators that came out of the hearings on Wednesday evening making comments that it is a waste of time, the process is inappropriate, and time to move on is now going to face their constituents. Of course, many of us knew they would be on the side of innocence because their complicity has been shown by the prosecution. The two Republican Senators from Florida saved face to their insurrectionist and chief while Lindsay Graham played into the concerns about how this looks to the public and what terrible things to show innocent people. Along the same lines as the former president not telling the public how deadly contagious COVID-19 is.

Hearing the audio and seeing the body cameras from the police officers was by far the most devastating piece of evidence the prosecution trial managers presented. I believe there is a moral compass that many people are ignoring for the sake of their broken political compass. Historically this will forever be a stain on not only these politicians, but the men and women that support and approve of the rhetoric that comes from Trumpism. And here are the questions I want to ask any supporter of this rhetoric; If the Republicans are the party of "Law and Order" why did this happen? If Republicans believe that "Blue Lives Matter" why were there men and women using any weapon they could find (flag poles, fire extinguishers, railings, their boot), to beat the hell out of these police officers? And finally, what drives you to ignore your principles and stay the course for a man that would push you under the bus for his 15 minutes of fame?

On Friday, February 12, 2021, the last few hours were the question and answer session. Now, I am not sure how many people watched this portion, it was long and arduous. Yet I must say I felt insulted with the righteous indignation of Trump's attorney, Mr. van der Veen from Philadelphia, PA, theatrical and absurd. His role as the attorney "not from around these parts," was straight from a scene of "Mr. Smith Goes To Washington." However, Mr. van der Veen you are not Jimmy Stewart and that role you played was only for an audience of one.

Then Saturday morning the world watched as confusion and collusion was played out in the same chamber that was overrun by insurgents a few weeks ago. In the end, the Democrats succumbed to the obvious outcome that was always foreseeable by everyone. Mr. Trump was acquitted for a second time and the world cried inside.

Is this America, is this the standard of our democracy going forward? I know from watching this hearing I am not going silently into the night and accepting this as normal. No one should be bullied and harassed for being an American and having a voice. Just like the preamble to the constitution states, "We the People of the United States, in order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity……."