Skip to content
TrackPodcasts
newsDec 1, 20201:07:57pending

OA443: The (Terrible) Case Against Indicting Trump

About this episode

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)

Get every episode summarized

Each time Opening Arguments publishes, we email you a written briefing from the transcript — the topics, who appeared, and any specific claims, with the ad reads skipped.

Email me new episodes

Free for 3 shows. No card needed.

No transcript yet

This episode has not been transcribed. Request it and it moves to the front of the queue.

OA443: The (Terrible) Case Against Indicting Trump

Opening Arguments

0:00
1:07:57

More episodes

More from Opening Arguments

View all episodes →