She’d have won if not for, well, take your pick. Wienergate, Comeygate, Russiagate. I have no admiration for her, but she did not claim that parties in or outside the US cheated in the electoral process itself. Nobody claimed that the voting and counting process itself could not be trusted. That’s entirely new this year, and it’s coming from the WH.

Nobody in Congress claimed that the election itself in 2016 was illegitimate. Too many claimed that issues with Russia amounted to an impeachable offense. I could find common ground with you there. Far as I’m concerned the country has long since been too impeachment happy, looking for ways to get out of the consequences of elections. The bar to impeach a president should be off the charts high. And I join with repubs in saying dems fell down on that, and may well have reaped what they will sow in the future.

So, if and when repubs take back the house and decide to impeach Biden over Hunter’s laptops or some such, I will oppose that as much as I did efforts to impeach Trump, but will agree that the dems helped lay the foundation for it if it happens. Your analogy will hold up in that case.

That is an entirely different accusation than “the election itself was a fraud!” When you look to impeach you implicitly acknowledge that the person you are impeaching was duly elected. You are engaging in a lawful political process to remove the elected person.

That’s not what Trump is doing. He is making an unprecedented assault on the veracity of American electoral processes themselves. Fully evidence free so far. Your analogy to that is completely invalid, and just reveals the way Trumpies are justifying the unjustifiable to themselves.