Jump to content

Saucer

Sheep
  • Content count

    639
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

58

Recent Profile Visitors

291 profile views
  1. Obama didn't need Congressional approval to attack Assad under the War Powers Act. He sought Congressional approval to cover his ass after unilaterally drawing his red line and then wimping out from enforcing it. Meanwhile he mocked Romney for saying Russia was America's biggest threat. "The 1980s are now calling for their foreign policy back." Remember that gem?
  2. He armed Ukraine and opposes Nord Stream 2. Meanwhile Team Pussy Hat let Putin annex the Crimea without a fight and let Assad walk right over his red line.
  3. You're a little kid. That you wouldn't even spend two minutes to look it up before shooting your dumb mouth off. https://foreignpolicy.com/2018/04/13/trumps-russia-policy-is-better-than-obamas/
  4. Oh hell yes it is. The Democrats would've come off as complete hypocrites who threw an honorable man under the bus. The optics would've been terrible.
  5. It's as absurd as the Democrats trying to block Garland after hollering how unfair it was for the Republicans to block him. And it was a card Mitch had no problem playing when he thought the stakes were high enough.
  6. Cragface, the Republicans killed that rule. Do you know anything? https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/06/us/politics/gorsuch-supreme-court-vote.html
  7. Yeah it's ridiculous to think Mitch would kill the filibuster rule. Great argument. The only risk was Obama withdrawing the nomination, but the chances of that were small. It would've been a betrayal of Garland. That's not Obama's style.
  8. Cragface, Mitch killed the filibuster. He could've done it during the lame duck session if he had wanted to.
  9. Nope. They wouldn't have had control until January. They didn't have the power to run out the clock.
  10. That's completely irrelevant to Mitch's plan. If Hillary had won, he had until early January to confirm Garland. That's exactly what I just said. LOL! Mitch's plan was to vote Garland in if Hillary won. You really are completely retarded. It's almost magical. The seat was on the line regardless of whether Mitch blocked the vote or the GOP voted him down. Truly almost magical in your stupidity.
  11. Here Jer, let me end the torture for you. Mitch's plan: Highly unlikely Obama would nominate someone to the right of Garland if he's voted down, so wait until after the election to take action. If the Dems win, confirm him. If the GOP wins, block him entirely. The optics of not voting on him aren't good but the optics of voting down multiple candidates including centrists would be worse. It was all over the media for months. That you can't even remember it says volumes.
  12. You can't intelligently evaluate Mitch's plan if you don't even know what it was. You got caught doing your blowhard Cliff Claven routine again.
  13. You've been reduced to "I'm rubber, you're glue." Pitiful.
  14. Haven't been able to find a Voxsplainer yet? Keep stalling, I'm sure they have one.
  15. Let's start with you not even knowing what Mitch's plan was.
×