Reflections on Trump’s Second Impeachment

Samantha Roberts

At this point, it’s public knowledge as to what happened at the capital in early January. Those events led to Trump being put in the hot seat for impeachment. By now, it’s been completed, and a lot of people’s disappointments have been realized. With a 57-43 ruling, with figures such as Mitch McConnel voting against their condemnation of the president and acquitting him, it’s hard to witness such things. But before this, many people could have questions regarding the impeachment. Compared to others, is it going in a timely manner? Some were asked on this matter, and here is where you can see a few different viewpoints on this story. 

First, comes the pace of the trials. Were they taking a good amount of time, or not? Some say that they aren’t sure what’s at a fast or slow pace, such as science teacher Mrs. Kathryn Komar who says “The bureaucracy of the government always seems to go at a slow pace so it’s not surprising that this is the same.” But that slow pace can be necessary according to junior Caroline Lehman, who says “Both sides needed time to carefully organize and strengthen their arguments, so I think the amount of time was probably necessary.” So, it must seem that the pace is understandable for a trial of this magnitude. It’s easy to look from the sides of those who have to compile the evidence, and no one really wants to rush a trial, right?

But what do people think should happen to the main focus of this trial, Donald Trump? Many again believe that barring him from office is the step to take, but some, like English teacher Patrick Gleason believes that doing this will divide these factions of the country even more, which is to think that Trump will be held accountable, but “at what cost.” And this is understandable as well. We don’t need these terrorists to make more cause for anger, but all the same he does point out that “his running for office again and possibly losing again could tear us even further apart.” Although this was proven to have the Senate let him off freely, there wasn’t much else to go through on such a matter.

But what did people expect the Senate to do? Many found the results to be bleak, and are unsure about the future. While Mr. Gleason “Doesn’t see enough senators against Trump,” Lehman worries that “the senators will not listen intently to the evidence,” and Mrs. Komar is “not very optimistic.” These worried outlooks can be understood, especially due to those in office having given a result that was unfavorable back in 2017. And, it seemed that they were right. The trial ended as sadly as they had thought, so there wasn’t enough for the guilty ruling.

Another question comes when you think about what comes after the trial, and people have differing opinions. Ms. Komar “doesn’t think it will have a prolonged effect,” but Lehman is unsure about the safety of the nation no matter what the result ends up being. Mr. Gleason can think of a best case scenario though where “people come together,” but doesn’t count on that either. Although things might stay the same, there still should be changes that can help this country as a whole.

Due to the ruling that had taken prevalence here, many are dissatisfied with what had taken place. Although we may not like what has happened, people have to fight for their own issues now. And we can learn from this mistake, because if people like Trump try to incite this again, we’ll know what to do.