Disappointed citizen

I watched the impeachment hearings as often as possible.

I was very moved by the testimony of those career personnel who voluntarily gave testimony at the hearing. To me, there was more than enough evidence for the House to impeach the president.

Yet, not a single Republican joined the impeachment decision. That bothered me, but I thought that there would be much less polarization in the Senate, where the hearing would be attended by Judge Roberts of the Supreme Court.

At the age of 86, I discovered my recollection of the Senate was apparently history. Indeed, the hearings reminded me of the machine politics that existed in Chicago for so many years. All of the Republicans were in lock step with their leader who was in lock step with his leader, i.e., the president. It didn't seem to matter how hard and how well the House managers did their job. It was like nobody was listening. I became very confused as to why Judge Roberts was at the hearing.

To some extent, I can understand why he did not want to get involved in the situation, but why could he not at least get involved in a few of the issues being contested, i.e., the matter of having witnesses and/or documents during the hearing? Why could he not have done "something" about these issues I thought, so that the hearing and the country could have been better served?

I find it hard to understand why this important and knowledgeable man was limited to screening and reading the cards with the questions from the senators.

And now we're left with a president whose behavior since the hearings has only further illustrated why he was impeached by the House. That's my sincere opinion.

Frank Ardito Jr.

Huntley