|
Re: Objectively intelligent.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
I may have argued it that way. In my thinking, all is fair and innocent in politics. (I’ll stipulate I did. I truly don’t recall because what I say to you doesn’t mean shit to me.) It makes no difference. I think obstruction of a political investigation is fine. The investigation is tainted, so a target is excused no matter what he does.
I’d give Clinton back his law license. Guilty or not, it’s frivolous. Only matters to officious opponents like you, and in the case of Clinton, Richard Mellon Scaife. Right, left — all hall monitors.
So again, Ralph, or Cartman, what’s my demerit? Cite me the rule, and how many days detention for refusing to recognize the naive ideal politics should be assiduously policed by opponents starting political witch hunts against each other?
|
How do you tell if an investigation is "political"?
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
