Nothing was done that led to separating Trump from the ability to run for public office, or prevent the man, who committed multiple crimes, including rape, fraud, theft of classified documents and sedition. How did that happen, under a Democratic party administration committed to the rule of law?
A half truth? Can't be that, since Trump is President.
There were Democrats who openly said it, once it became clear we had won the 2020 election including control of Congress. Amending the Judiciary Act of 1789 once more, this time to add additional seats to the Supreme Court that Biden could appoint, to neutralize the gang of six corrupt judges, was the most plausible and effective means available to Democrats to make sure Trump was convicted of inciting insurrection and rendered unable to run for public office, likely landing him in prison. That would have required also eliminating the Senate filibuster, since the GOP would have used that to block the vote. Yes, there was risk involved, but what was more important, saving the Constitution and the democracy, or preserving useless Senate traditions and avoiding the vague, nebulous accusation of "political motivation"?
Garland's appointment of special prosecutor Jack Smith turned out to be a gigantic waste, without court support to back it up. Less than nothing, in fact.
A packed court would have guaranteed the insurrection trial would be expedited, there would have been no ridiculous immunity ruling, Roe could have been saved, Citizens United could have been overturned. Trump would be ineligible to run for office, and likely in prison. The NBC news carried the story, "Democrats to Introduce Bill to Expand Supreme Court from Nine to Thirteen Justices" Biden said he "wasn't a fan" of the idea, and Pelosi wouldn't bring it up for a vote.
Sometimes we are our own worst enemy.
= new reply since forum marked as read