Friend of the show Randall Eliason wrote an op-ed for the Washington Post called “The case against indicting Trump.” Both of us on the show strongly disagree with the arguments presented and humbly submit our enthusiastic rebuke of it.
Before that, Andrew answers the clickbaity question of whether or not Trump made a major mistake in pardoning Flynn. As with all clickbait, the answer is no. Finally, we briefly touch on the terrible new decision out of the Amy Coney Barrett era that is our new hell.
Links: Last election nail, Biden hopes to avoid divisive Trump investigations, Federal Prosecution of Election Offenses Seventh Edition May 2007, REPORT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE UNITED STATES SENATE, 20A87 Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn v. Cuomo (11/25/2020)
-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law
-Follow us on Twitter: @Openargs
-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed! @oawiki
-And finally, remember that you can email us at firstname.lastname@example.org
3 Replies to “OA443: The (Terrible) Case Against Indicting Trump”