Don't go down the route in the first place. But rich can not just pick up one on this point, because there is an argument that ar the case will be lost - but isn't therth the point of principle? That doesn't make it right to leave him be if there are clearly indictable offences here. So i have a multilaerd argument, just on the legalities. I don't think david has made a case. I don’t think the case is there. And if you're gon you can't be the least bit ae srits or novel in a case that this, that is this consequential. It's sa clear violation of the law
On January 6 2021 a pro-Trump mob stormed the U.S Capitol seeking to overturn the 2020 presidential election result. Rioters overran police and broke through windows chanting ‘stop the steal’ while threatening Vice President Mike Pence with violence. The moment sent shockwaves through America as people tried to understand how this could be happening in the world’s most powerful democracy. There is now growing pressure on the Department of Justice to prosecute Trump for his role in the incident after a set of public hearings revealed damning evidence of his actions. But others argue that while Trump’s conduct after the November 2020 election was reprehensible, not every wrongdoing, even a highly consequential one, is a crime. Who’s right and who’s wrong? To find out, we invited David Blight, Sterling Professor of American History at Yale University, and Rich Lowry, Editor-in-chief of National Review, to debate the issue. Our host for this discussion is journalist, academic and former White House correspondent for the BBC, Philippa Thomas.
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices