No. of Recommendations: 8
Exactly,. Due process has determined that there was not enough evidence to prove the case, ergo, non impeachable, and to not to be removed from ballots etc.
That's completely incorrect.
First, the evidence of specific intent is not necessary to prove that someone engaged in an insurrection in a civil proceeding. That's the point. A criminal determination of insurrection involves an element that isn't present in proving insurrection in a civil case, which is why it is entirely possible to prove that Trump has "engaged in insurrection" within the meaning of the 14A even if you can't prove that he committed the crime of insurrection under the relevant federal statute. And second, DOJ's declining to prosecute is not the same as an acquittal - there's no "due process" in determining that there isn't enough evidence to support a criminal prosecution, but an administrative decision.
