If you followed politics throughout the Trump presidency, we’d wager you could close your eyes and see Adam Schiff’s face. That’s because the California Democrat was the very symbol of Trump’s impeachment proceedings after he illegally tried to force Ukraine’s president to dig up dirt on his rival, Joe Biden.

We came to know Rep. Schiff as a stalwart of democracy, and nothing has changed our minds.

So when Adam Schiff says he disagrees with the new Attorney General’s reticence to investigate the former president for his connection to the January 6th insurrection and attempts to overturn the 2020 election, it’s hard not to side with the old pal who got us through the impeachment hearings.

In a Tuesday podcast, the 20-year congressman was asked about AG Merrick Garland’s seeming reluctance to go after Trump for any of the allegations found in the Mueller Report, and Schiff responded not just to that, but the fact that Garland is also kind of ignoring Trump’s violations that came after his impeachment.

I think there’s a real desire on the part of the Attorney General, for the most part, not to look backward. Do I disagree with that? […] I disagree with it most vehemently when it comes to what I consider even more serious offenses. For example, a taped conversation of Donald J. Trump on the phone with Brad Raffensperger, the Secretary of State from Georgia, trying to coerce him into fraudulently finding 11,780 votes.

In my view, you don’t ignore the crimes that have been committed by a president of the United States. They need to be investigated. You may reach the judgment once you’ve investigated something that the public interest in not prosecuting a former president outweighs the interests of justice. But I don’t think you could ignore the crimes.

The interview came just as the Intelligence Committee was preparing to vote on contempt charges for former Trump sidekick Steve Bannon.

The problem with all of this is different for Schiff and for Garland, unfortunately. For the former lead prosecutor in Trump’s impeachment, it’s the burden of knowing just how many crimes Trump committed, who he committed them with, and how long it’s gone unpunished. For Garland, the issue may be a holdover from when Republicans blocked his appointment to the Supreme Court during the Obama era: He may feel as though he can’t risk looking like he’s getting revenge on the GOP while retaining his credibility.

We’re with Schiff on this one, frankly. There’s a historical pattern of presidents not actually getting in any trouble for breaking the rules or even the law, and Trump’s examples were among the worst in American history. Continuing to let him off the hook is what leads to his followers believing that there are no consequences for their actions, either.