Dear John,

It was hard to sit through the impeachment trial. It was hard to debate and deliberate with my Senate colleagues when the evidence at trial demonstrated so clearly and obviously the right conclusion. But hardest by far was the two-hour vote acquitting Attorney General Ken Paxton of all 16 articles of impeachment that the Republican-controlled House had sent to the Republican-controlled Senate.

Mid-way through the voting I saw through the window the United States and Texas flags, blowing proudly in the wind. How sickeningly ironic, it felt, that at the moment the Texas Senate was weakening the institutions those flags represent.

I spent the afternoon spewing venom in media interviews. By late afternoon I’d had quite enough of my own thoughts. So when a friend called with an extra ticket to the UT football game, I gratefully accepted.

Watch the game? No way. People wanted to talk about the trial. “What the heck?” a friend asked without even first saying hello. That was the reaction of just about everyone, irrespective of party affiliation. What the heck, indeed.

Nothing equivocal about it: Paxton abused his office — flagrantly, shockingly, and persistently. Time and time again, he ordered subordinates to act contrary to their professional judgment, each time overriding their pleas that he not abuse his office. He interfered in public information requests, foreclosure sales, and private litigation. He used state resources and his office’s powers — including criminal process! — to attack state and federal law enforcement officials (so much for “back the blue”) and private individuals. He did all of this to benefit a friend and business associate who, the evidence showed, did favors in return. Even without the favors (bribery), Paxton’s actions violated the public trust.

So how did he get acquitted? Did my Senate colleagues not find the rank abuse of office — demonstrated clearly and compellingly at trial by brave and credible witnesses and a volume of documentation — worthy of impeachment? That in and of itself is a deeply troubling question.

Charitably, I’ll entertain the notion that a rational consideration of the evidence might yield reasonable but opposite conclusions as to any individual article of impeachment. In fact, I found material and reasonable doubt with respect to two, and only two, of the articles.

But what will likely vex us all over time is the seeming refusal by most Senate Republicans to consider the entire sequence of proven actions over the course of 2020. It is unfathomable to me that anyone viewing the facts objectively could conclude anything other than that Ken Paxton abused his office, did not respect his obligations to the people, and did not respect any legal constraints on his role as Attorney General. (I keep hearing them say “There was no smoking gun!” Nonsense. The Senate floor was littered with guns and they were all smoking.)

If there is good that came from this trial, it is that all doubt has been removed over whether the controlling faction of the Texas Republican Party stands for limited government, institutional integrity, or the rule of a law. It doesn’t. Democratic leaders do.

It now falls to us, as Democrats, to demonstrate true commitment to these essential and — provided we succeed — enduring principles.

We must restore our public institutions to their proper role of serving the public good. May we remember that when the 2024 election comes around.