thank you for your great discussion on relative verses absolute risk. extremely useful. After I read that article I made my way to your analysis here. While I think that your analysis here is reasonable to a point, I would disagree with the notion that hiding immoral and illegal behavior, ie, paying off Stormy Daniels to be quiet about t…
thank you for your great discussion on relative verses absolute risk. extremely useful. After I read that article I made my way to your analysis here. While I think that your analysis here is reasonable to a point, I would disagree with the notion that hiding immoral and illegal behavior, ie, paying off Stormy Daniels to be quiet about their affair, and using campaign finance money to do it, should be interpreted as a misdemeanor. Using logic much along the lines of your absolute verses relative risk analysis, there is far more at stake here then a mere coverup for immoral behavior. If Mr Trump were just trying to hide an illicit affair, and using money that was not his to do it, even that in itself seem to rise about the level of misdemeanor. However, when the obfuscation illegally created critically affects tens of millions of decisions as to who is best to vote for the next President of the United States, that must be interpreted more seriously than a misdemeanor, otherwise the law would be useless to prevent such acts from happening on a regular basis. When the leadership of the Free World is in the balance, characterizing the illegal acts as a misdemeanor is an insult to common sense, and the notion that no one should be above the law.
Martin: I understand your position, but in almost all states having an affair is not against the law. Further, the facts regarding what transpired in the case you site, are in dispute. That said, people all the time agree to a settlement (payment) as it is a lesser of evils — NOT that they are guilty.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree since I see this as much more then then merely having an affair. But I appreciate your civil tone. I have written comments in both more progressive and more conservative substack accounts and have had obscenities hurled at me simply because I don't happen to agree with the authors point of view. Of course the author themselves would never do such a thing. Such comments emerge from among the exuberant followers. In this Tribal Minded world a calm discussion/debate becomes more of a rarity than had once been the case. Have a great Christmas and New Year.
thank you for your great discussion on relative verses absolute risk. extremely useful. After I read that article I made my way to your analysis here. While I think that your analysis here is reasonable to a point, I would disagree with the notion that hiding immoral and illegal behavior, ie, paying off Stormy Daniels to be quiet about their affair, and using campaign finance money to do it, should be interpreted as a misdemeanor. Using logic much along the lines of your absolute verses relative risk analysis, there is far more at stake here then a mere coverup for immoral behavior. If Mr Trump were just trying to hide an illicit affair, and using money that was not his to do it, even that in itself seem to rise about the level of misdemeanor. However, when the obfuscation illegally created critically affects tens of millions of decisions as to who is best to vote for the next President of the United States, that must be interpreted more seriously than a misdemeanor, otherwise the law would be useless to prevent such acts from happening on a regular basis. When the leadership of the Free World is in the balance, characterizing the illegal acts as a misdemeanor is an insult to common sense, and the notion that no one should be above the law.
Martin: I understand your position, but in almost all states having an affair is not against the law. Further, the facts regarding what transpired in the case you site, are in dispute. That said, people all the time agree to a settlement (payment) as it is a lesser of evils — NOT that they are guilty.
I guess we will just have to agree to disagree since I see this as much more then then merely having an affair. But I appreciate your civil tone. I have written comments in both more progressive and more conservative substack accounts and have had obscenities hurled at me simply because I don't happen to agree with the authors point of view. Of course the author themselves would never do such a thing. Such comments emerge from among the exuberant followers. In this Tribal Minded world a calm discussion/debate becomes more of a rarity than had once been the case. Have a great Christmas and New Year.