Want to get notified of all questions as they are asked? Update your mail preferences and turn on "Instant Notification."
Hello! I am social psychologist and author, Bo Bennett. In this podcast, I take a critical thinking-, reason-, and science-based approach to issues that matter. As of January 2020, this podcast is a collection of topics related to all of my books. Subscribe today and enjoy!
|
Totally agree with Dr Bo.
I would also add that you accidentally Affirmed the Consequent in your wet pavement example. Whether a sitting President can be indicted is definitely a legal question rather than a logical one. AG Barr is apparently of the opinion that they cannot. However, AG Barr also argues that you cannot commit obstruction of justice if there is no underlying crime. This is a bizarre assertion and puts him very much in the minority of the legal profession, and calls into question to what extent motivated reasoning and special pleading are driving his public utterances in this case. Certainly Robert Mueller indicated very strongly in his report that the Congressional solution (ie impeachment) was the way to deal with these crimes. As to whether tribal politics puts Trump above the law? I'm not sure we can say that. Yes, it means he is significantly more likely to be acquitted by the Senate if the House chose to impeach, but then in a regular court attractive people are less likely to be found guilty than unattractive people ( www.psychologytoday.com/g. . . Does that mean unattractive people are 'above the law', or does it just mean the system of justice has some inherent flaws? |
answered on Monday, Jul 08, 2019 11:52:42 AM by Jim Cliff |
Comments |
|