If the President were a criminal prosecutor, he would try to convict a defendant, not based on the evidence he was presented, but in his personal belief of guilt or innocence.  If evidence were presented contrary to his beliefs, he would question the evidence rather than his beliefs. 

Fortunately, in our criminal system, judges throw out cases not based on evidence and defense attorneys quickly attack the lack of evidence.  If the police presented evidence that was somehow tainted, rather than challenge the veracity of the evidence, the President would accept the evidence if it agreed with his preconceptions and ignore it if it disagreed with his preconceptions.

Now the America jury has to decide whether this President should be disbarred from office, because this President uses propaganda techniques to convince others of his views rather than the facts.

Hopefully this will reframe the issue of George Bush in such a way that won't be taken as Democratic or Republican, but corruption vs. truth.

Contact Andy Yonce