dude the founding fathers were all british subjects who committed an act of high treason against the crown. They were well aware that criminal prosecutions can be politicized and applied selectively. If somebody can commit a felony and still get voted in by more than half the country that reflects poorly on the criminal justice system not the election.

> dude the founding fathers were all british subjects who committed an act of high treason against the crown

Because they objected to a powerful, unaccountable ruler with absolute immunity to the law.

> They were well aware that criminal prosecutions can be politicized and applied selectively.

And that's why they set up checks and balances, three branches of government, the Bill of Rights, etc. instead of a monarch. Asserting this means they wanted a monarch is... odd.

> If somebody can commit a felony and still get voted in by more than half the country that reflects poorly on the criminal justice system not the election.

I mean, yeah - the criminal justice system is clearly flawed here, as he's fundamentally getting away with the crimes. Garland fucked up by waiting too long; a judge Trump appointed successfully delayed the most serious criminal proceedings until they became meaningless, etc.

The election reflects poorly on the people. Which wouldn't have come as a big surprise to the Founding Fathers, who didn't really trust the people all that much - that's why we have the electoral college, after all.