The tone and temperament of American political dialogue has declined markedly in recent years. While it’s never been easy to bridge our differences, what was once disagreement with the other side has somehow turned to anger and often to contempt. It’s ugly.

Moreover, that distinct downturn seems to have accompanied Donald Trump’s accession to power after his upset victory in the 2016 presidential election. Joe Biden’s 2020 win is attributed by many to the American voters’ thirst for a return to normalcy after the Trump chaos.

But here’s a contrarian view: The norm-busting we all observed in the Trump years had less to do with Donald Trump’s abrasive, aggressive demeanor than to the Democrats’ reaction to it — and notably to their campaign of systematic “resistance” to the unwelcome upstart and his regime.

The resistance was a consciously chosen political tactic, a concerted effort to derail or disrupt every Trump action, leading hopefully to utter failure of his administration. Even the name was chosen purposefully, conveying an air of noble intent — like the WWII French and Belgian resistance to the occupying Nazis, this one was envisioned as saving America from the evil Mr. Trump.

Of course, the inescapable problem with hyper-partisan obstruction — then or now — is that when an administration fails, the country fails with it. The Democrat Resistance to Trump was intense, relentless, very nearly successful, and did lasting harm. Think back:

• First there was the myth of Russia collusion. It was the perfect segue, already in motion pre-election courtesy of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, and a convenient excuse for Clinton’s embarrassing loss. For two and a half years, Russia collusion was all the rage, dominating the evening news and consuming enormous resources — until it all went up in smoke.

• Impeachment was on the table from the moment of Trump’s inauguration, with Democrats openly casting about for any conceivable excuse. Running out of time, they settled on Impeachment #1, alleging that the president implied a quid pro quo in return for a political favor in telephone conversation with the Ukrainian president. Yes, impeachment of a U.S. president for an ill-advised phone call.

• And, after January 6th (helped by Trump’s reckless post-election behavior) there was Impeachment #2 — a wholly meaningless action given that Trump had already left office when tried by the U.S. Senate.

For any who doubt how profoundly and how fast our political norms have deteriorated, consider that the Democrats’ spent the better part of Trump’s term in an all-out mission, using methods proper and not, to prove that the 2016 election was stolen with Russian help — call it “election denial.” One administration later, election denial and attendant action to challenge election results have been deemed an impeachable and indictable offense.

Against that background, it is rich today to listen to Democrats’ sputtering indignation regarding the GOP announced plans to initiate a congressional impeachment inquiry into Biden’s behavior, without “a shred of evidence.”

In this case, there are in fact quite a few evidence “shreds” — some more like steel cables — including whistleblower testimony, direct contradiction of the president’s assertions by persons involved, numerous emails, bank records, and large financial transfers via shell companies (the classic indicator of money laundering) to Biden family members who would have had no part in legitimate business activity. These quite possibly add up to bribery on Biden’s part — an impeachable offense, per the U.S. Constitution — and at the very least a Mount Everest-sized conflict of interest.

Again, declining norms are in play. In better times, the impeachment inquiry into Biden’s behavior would be treated by both sides as a legitimate one and would elicit somber concern from Democrats and Republicans. Fifty years ago, on a less serious matter, Republicans joined Democrats in challenging President Richard Nixon’s behavior; just a year before, Nixon had won reelection in a landslide — but the bipartisan furor was enough to convince him to step down from office, avoiding impeachment and conviction.

Nor does today’s norm-challenged government seem up to the task of delivering even-handed justice. Indications of Biden’s serious improprieties are nothing new. He personally bragged about shutting down an investigation into his son’s Burisma colleagues by threatening to withhold U.S. financial aid (ironically, an explicit quid pro quo). That episode, the infamous Hunter laptop, and other sources of pertinent information have all been swept under the table, unlikely to see the light of day without a serious impeachment inquiry.

There is no way to define “normal” in partisan interactions, but we’ve gone far beyond the point of presenting to the public an open market of ideas. Returning the U.S. presidency to a candidate fully committed to restoring mutual respect — in my view, neither Trump nor Biden — would be a good first step.