Presidential Indictments and How We Justify Bad Acts
Holding the Other Side to a Higher Standard
We’ve all heard people excuse immoral or unethical behavior in many different ways. One of the more common involves pointing out that the act wasn’t a criminal offense. When someone they like does something wrong, we hear about how “it wasn’t a crime.” Minimizing the act in this way makes it easier for us to live with it.
Political dirty tricks are a great example of this. Some of us frown on this stuff while wishing it was as effective as it often is. We are quick to outrage when their side does it. We scream about how it was unfair and wrong. But what about when our side does it? We may not like it, but at least it wasn’t a crime.
This norm seems to have changed in an interesting way. Today, there are many people who wouldn’t care if it was a crime as long as it came from their side. If they no longer have the option of pointing out that it wasn’t a crime, they’ll use other tactics.
They might conjure a politically motivated conspiracy to discredit their candidate. They’ll claim bias. The police framed him. The prosecutor had it in for him. The judge was “an activist judge.” Another approach would be to claim that the situation somehow justified the crime. The goal is for the conviction to become a crime…
