6 months ago
Which side makes a better case?
1 Comment
  • Filter by:
  • Pro
  • Draw
  • Con
  • 6 months ago

    Wow...where to begin.

    First - Bronson suggests that Trump HAD an ethical obligation to obstruct/block the bogus investigation. At 8 minutes - he is suggesting that Trump DIDN'T do it, because he is not ethical or moral.

    Assuming Trump didn't do the 'ethical or moral thing' because he is unethical and immoral is a BIG stretch. It presumes that the answer is binary - and Trump didn't do the ethical or moral thing.

    The REAL factor is that obstructing an investigation that has been kicked off by a huge number of UNETHICAL and VERY immoral people - can be politically STUPID to do. Even a highly ethical and moral person - obstructing the investigation, would fall into a carefully contrived trap. The Mueller Investigation - through calculated leaks - was hoping to either find evidence of corruption and therefore find a path to removing Trump....OR - create enough havoc (through leaks...suggesting Trump, Jr. might be indicted, suggesting criminality were none existed) - might trigger Trump to do the 'ethically moral thing' and fire the unethical Mueller. THEN - the unethical lying Mainstream media and the corrupt Democrats in Congress would swiftly march to Impeachment. GOAL - defeat Trump in 2020. MAYBE -create a public relations nightmare to influence enough Republican Senators to vote for conviction if the Senate heard the House presentation after impeachment.

    The RIGHT THING TO DO - was to NOT interfere ...because to do otherwise - would be politically stupid. It was a TRAP - that Trump did NOT fall into.

    The real ethical thing to do - let Mueller spin his wheels. The investigation is now over. NOW - the ethical thing to do is to prove the maxim...'When you strike at a king, you must kill him' (RWEmerson.) Failing to kill the king (Trump) - now Trump must use his power to rightfully find and punish the people who tried to have a coup against a rightfully elected President.

    Edwin's arguments - not credible. So - no vote for him.
    Bronson has better arguments - and he is totally correct that the Russia investigation was bad and was a corrupt thing. BUT- he doesn't make a valid case for Trump to interfere - because trying to do so might result in a Pyrrhic Victory...