There was no precident, to deny President Obama's nomination, Mitch McConnell used his power and timing to save the nomination for the next President. If, you bothered to go to the Supreme Court web site even they denounced what was going on.
No hyperbole seems sufficient: "I am starting to think Trump is bad." "Bad? Do you love Trump or something? He's worse than Hitler!" "Yeah, twice as bad!" "Twice? Only twice?? Where's your MAGA hat, maggot?" "Oh, uh, no, I mean, he's 10 million times worse." "You mean billion, don't you?" "Uh yeah, 200 billion times worse." "That's better."
I quoted HRC's comments word for word in the OP and asked a question. Which you have failed to answer. And the riot wasn't coordinated with Trump or with his campaign, is the point, as the FBI found and as any casual observer could tell at a glance at that horned Qanon hat. Change it to 5,000 "insurrectionists" and you're still missing evidence of coordination with Trump or his operatives. Hurts, don't it?
Yes I did, I destroyed your interpretation. You haven't been watching the Republican Witness's testimony have you. There seems to be a lot of evidence. You tell me; I'm fine.
I've seen some of it. Asking me to watch Adam Schiff preen every day is cruel and unusual punishment. And "seems to be"? I don't care about "seems." There is zero evidence of coordination between Trump or his entourage and the rioters. Zero. Reminds me somehow of the goose eggs that Mueller came up in the expensive and interminable Russian collusion investigation, another ridiculous story initiated by ... who else? Hillary Clinton. Are we seeing a pattern, yet?
Have you ever even heard of Robby Mook? I guess he got sucked down the same hole: During testimony given in cross-examination of the trial of Michael Sussmann, Robby Mook, testified on May 20, 2022 that the 2020 Democratic presidential nominee [that would be HRC] agreed to provide information about a link between her opponent Donald Trump and Russian Alfa Bank to a reporter, despite the fact that her campaign was not certain about the truth of the allegations.
I spelled it out pretty clearly. If we are on the verge of losing democracy, it means we have democracy now. If the voters reject the Democratic nominee in 2024, while we still have democracy, that is their call, not hers, but she's going to call the result a loss of democracy.
You are excited. Look at all these colors in your signature! I have no propaganda. I have no agenda either. I am against HRC's phony and disingenuous conflation of Republican electoral wins with the "loss of democracy." Let me tell you something: the DNC has come up with this "losing our democracy" mantra to scare you into embracing anything they say. They aren't trying to save democracy. It's ridiculous. They say it over and over hoping that it will worm its way into your head. I honestly hope that it has not.
Which obfuscates HRC's point ... again. We have a Democracy/Republic because of MEN and WOMEN like Rusty Bowers, Ruby Freeman, Brad Rafensburger and Shay Moss; that stood up to tRaitor tRumps tyranny. If a non-tRumpublican runs on the Republican ticket, yes, we'll still have a "democracy".
I've had that sig for months, you're really at a loss aren't you? But, hey keep it up. I'm glad to point out what a serious threat to Government BY THE PEOPLE tRaitor tRump is. LoL, your whole OP is propaganda. Americans are worried, and justifiably so ~ after tRaitor tRumps conspiracy to stay in power, that if he's elected again, January 6th 2021 will be his dress rehearsal.
Let me be more specific there is no precident to refuse to even consider a Presidents Supreme Court Nomination. As provided in Article II of OUR Constitution.
I think you're wrong - several examples just from the last election - Pence, Raffensberger, Kemp, Bowers, all took decisions, extremely unpopular with their own party and to their own political and personal cost, in order to protect democracy. I think I've already said that "at any cost" was too hyperbolic. But it was shameful what he attempted to do, can we agree on that at least? I'll certainly agree with you that Trump causes a complete breakdown in perspective for some people.
Oh, sure it was shameful! I said and believed that the day of. Indeed, I am more ashamed and embarrassed than indignant or offended. He failed as a man and failed as a leader on Jan. 6. Even if he avoids prosecution, and that's a 50/50 proposition, he will at best go down as a president who has "cause in fact" responsibility for a disgusting display of mass hooliganism and who failed to do his utmost to stop it when he had the chance. Now, you'd have to get the secret service in on the conversation to know if he could have physically intervened, as I would have preferred. I doubt they would have let him within a half mile of the Capitol, even if he had ordered it. Nobody argues with the secret service.
It was reported the secret service had told him before Jan 6th that he couldn't march with the crowd, but I don't know what that is based on.
I'm not so sure you are since it blows a hole in the right wing media narrative that what happened on 1/6 was a spontaneous event that got out of control.
I want to offer a different complaint now about HRC's remarks from what I had space to offer in the OP. I like to complain, see, and people like to hear me complain. . Her concerns are twofold and, or so she claims, interlocking: 1) transgenderism and defund the police are fringe issues that will cost Democrats the election; and 2) we are on the precipice of losing Democracy. Notice she didn't dare trash the BLM movement in point #1, though she surely thought it; the lady has chutzpah, but not that much! Point 2 we have done to death and, as usual, left and right disagree. But as to point 1, her telling proponents of defunding the police that they are going to cost Democrats the election is arrogant, preachy, judgmental, ballsy, and insensitive. Maybe it's just an example of being tin-eared: she could have said the same thing by exhorting Democrats to focus on whatever she things is more important ... inequality, I imagine, another howler coming from a multimillionaire gifted who has never produced anything. But no, she had to trash her own fellow Democrats by saying that they will be complicit in destroying Democracy because they don't prioritize issues as she does. It almost makes me want to march with transgender activists to demand ... whatever it is that they are unhappy about. It's evidence of the same tension that existed between her and the DNC and Bernie Sanders. I couldn't see it so clearly on 2020, but there it is now, loud and clear. And I do love it so.
What in the world are you talking about? If there is a new FBI report that contradicts the findings of the first, which found no collusion with the Trump campaign, no one has pointed to it here. I'll be glad to read it. Just cite it.
You can safely assume that they said "no" and didn’t brook any disagreement. Did you know that if the President of the United States tells the secret service that he wants to go to McDonald's, alone, to enjoy a happy meal, and orders them to keep away, that they will ignore him?