Thursday, March 30, 2017

Is this real?

   All other absurdities aside for the moment, and there are many of them, let's take a single issue:
      Should a person remain on a commission for investigating someone if that person has secured and secreted pertinent information about that someone, and, instead of referring that information to the commission who is charged with the investigation, furtively relays that information to the very person who is being investigated?
   This issue should not need much consideration to reach a decision. Yet some profess it's a quandary, endowing this course of action with a guise of normalcy.  There is only one answer to the above question.   No.  Absolutely not.  No one can be an impartial party who divulges  information to the  person being investigated.  No reasonable person can come to any other conclusion, right?

No comments: