Conservatives saw the savagery of 911 in the attacks and prepared for war; liberals saw the savagery of the 911 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers.
The idea is not to get to a conclusion if the Democrats and the media have their way. Now, arguing against - other than common sense. Arguing against a relatively quick conclusion here is that this investigation will include whatever has been done or not done by Michael Flynn. And if the special counsel decides that there need to be indictments, well, then you can forget about a quick wrap-up to anything. If there are indictments, subpoenas, investigations, if there's gonna be trials, then you can throw rapidity out the window.
Let's see in those indictments you can't level at Sweden, they never tried to ban the constitution or undermine the settlement that they wanted. Well you can't say that of Canada. Any indication of revolt on the part of Quebec was either bought off, with a good deal of corruption.
But perhaps the most important difference between Conservatives and Liberals can be found in the area of national security. Conservatives saw the savagery of 911 in the attacks and prepared for war. Liberals saw the savagery of the 911 attacks and wanted to prepare indictments and offer therapy and understanding for our attackers. In the wake of 911, Conservatives believed it was time to unleash the might and power of the United States military against the Taliban.
