Is there a place for moral outrage in politics?

 An attribute of Biden's character that gets overlooked is his moral clarity. There is obvious evil in this world, and it needs to be called out, but is there a place for it in politics? Yes, if the evidence justifies it.  Nowhere has moral clarity been expressed more obviously than his outrage at the atrocities committed by Russian troops in Ukraine and his accusing Putin of being a war criminal for targeting civilians as part of a war strategy.  Six weeks into Russia's invasion of Ukraine videos of intentional targeting of civilians cannot be ignored, whether it was a clearly marked as a refuge for children in Mariupol or streets strewn with civilian corpses in Bucha with video evidence it occurred during Russian occupation. There is a pattern of hospitals being frequent Russian targets. Patterns of behavior are evidence in criminal trials. It will take years before who gave the orders, and their accountability will become formalized by international tribunals. In the meantime, moral outrage is more than justified.  International tribunals are already motivated by such accusations and are actively investigating already, .  The US Department of Justice head, Attorney General  Merrick Garland. announced today the DOJ will continue to assist the tribunal investigations.  Post-World War II and the Nuremberg trials, the most recent example of how tribunals act in the face of war crime accusations is in the 1991-1995 Balkan war atrocities like the Srebrenica massacre .and the Hague tribunal. See my recent post on the subject. 

 This is in stark contrast with someone like Donald Trump who abuses or ignores the moral element. He still will not criticize Putin and even dares ask Putin for a political favor last month as convincing evidence of atrocities by Russian invaders Ukraine were reported. Trump had no shame or concern about  morality in pursuit of his political objective.  From the beginning of his 2016 campaign, Trump touted his advantages of being transactional in his dealings because of his business success. Over the years, we now know what being transactional is about.  Transactional to Trump has meant he will do what benefits him politically or it will benefit those supporting him.  Morality is not a criteria for what is a successful transaction. Lying to explain failures is simply a strategy, not a moral no-no. Example number one  is knowingly lying about his loss in 2020 yet claiming his loss was because 'Democrats stole the election, even though courts and his own attorney general told him otherwise. He still sings that same tune, though after a year and a half of audits, all kinds of investigative journalism, still no evidence has emerged that there was enough hanky panky in the election to prove it was stolen. However, Trump persists to this day and his followers echo him. Both are still a large force in the Republican party. .  

Another strategy of Donald Trump is to paint his opponents with immorality while he himself is under investigation, and court rulings of his own corrupt practices have come to public light. His abuse of his charitable foundation funds for his benefit and a university found fraudulent are a few cases in point  where Trump himself was found culpable by courts. He is in danger of being accused of fraud in tax and loan applications by over or undervaluing property to benefit him.. His role in January 6 is still a question mark. This abuse of the moral issue is his way of deflecting criticism of his own practices by charging his opponents as being  either equally corrupt or flawed as well, even if it a false equivalency or an unproved theory. He knows that while he himself places no value in being moral, others do, and are willing and eager to join him  in calling the kettle black, even if there is no evidence.  Top of that list one is the Hunter Biden saga. It is classic Trump: "if you think my family and I are corrupt or criminals, just let me show Biden and his son are too".   The dishonesty of the right wing supporters of Trump is claiming his father, Joe Biden, benefited or helped  his son when there is no  evidence of that. The alleged events took place when Joe Biden was neither in office or a candidate, and there is no proof he pocketed any money from any of Hunter's ventures or that he helped Hunter.    The dishonesty of the right is an old propaganda technique,  to refer to the" Biden crime family", hoping the phrase is enough proof in itself it is true if it is repeated enough. 

The long list of legal cases against Donald Trump | Donald Trump | The Guardian