Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: We are here because of Garland's foot dragging. Now the Supremes can delay until a trial is not possible [View all]chicoescuela
(1,032 posts)31. You're right and it isn't Joe
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
147 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
We are here because of Garland's foot dragging. Now the Supremes can delay until a trial is not possible [View all]
Stinky The Clown
Feb 28
OP
Me too and the fucking message said don't spread right wing talking points. LIKE I'D DO THAT SHIT???
ArkansasDemocrat1
Feb 28
#48
I think I'd rather have my tooth drilled than live through another trump term.
Comfortably_Numb
Feb 29
#77
Garland was never a Democrat. I have never considered him a Democratic "Figure" by virtue of his appointment.
msfiddlestix
Feb 29
#109
They'll have to kick us all off then. It's more than 3 years since J6 and trump has not been held to account yet.
brush
Feb 29
#128
Marathon Man! What an epic movie! Haven't thought of it in ages ... thanks for the memory.
KPN
Feb 29
#129
In theory Joe is, but it does appear that MG may not think so. Horribly disappointing
chicoescuela
Feb 28
#43
Be careful I wrote a discussion about this "touchy" subject and it got deleted and a ban threat.
BlueNIndiana
Feb 28
#45
Okay, so we can't criticise Garland here and we can't say MAGAt over there. Got it
ArkansasDemocrat1
Feb 28
#49
If he didn't realize that Cletus and his MAGA lodge brothers who carpooled to the Capitol to raise hell
Scrivener7
Feb 28
#32
And the incessant and snorky condescension of the Garland cheerleaders better stop now.
Scrivener7
Feb 28
#7
What does it say about our system that we are unable to prosecute someone who tried to
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#84
He might even deliver the final blow. He might tell Jack Smith to "stand down" after the conventions...
ecstatic
Feb 28
#38
Yes, he absolutely might. Because they have to be gentlemen, doncha know. Except when
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#85
Yes. Yes you were. And yes, you did take a lot of supercilious condescension from a handful of
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#86
I notice none of those folks have said we were right. They are also curiously missing from these threads.
onecaliberal
Feb 29
#130
But that's the last defense. I hope you're right, but it should never have come this far.
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#93
So do you think SCOTUS delaying the opinion on Trump's immunity is good for the country?
bluesbassman
Feb 29
#65
I don't understand how parsing "nobody is above the law" is helpful in this case.
stollen
Feb 29
#75
Ridiculous. Honestly. Of all the arguments the Garland cheerleaders made ad nauseam, that
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#88
Probably would have turned into a mess even if Garland started charging right away.
Silent Type
Feb 29
#60
Just an FYI...you can have a post removed for talking about forum moderation....i.e. complaining about it
PortTack
Feb 29
#79
The "crying laughing" emoji is a hint. And again, at least someone is enjoying this.
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#96
Intelligent and reasonable people look beyond the emoji and read the actual words. 🤣😂
Oopsie Daisy
Feb 29
#98
I think all your "laughter" tells its own story, which is certainly not refuted by your words.
Scrivener7
Feb 29
#99
My words and meaning are clear. The daily "I Hate Garland" threads serve no useful purpose *
Oopsie Daisy
Feb 29
#100
Actually we are here because enough self- identified progressive refused to vote for Hillary in 2016
JohnSJ
Feb 29
#101
No. We are here because SCOTUS is infested with criminals, anti-Constiutionalism and lack of ethics.
Wonder Why
Feb 29
#102
May I just remind folks, that Garland was never a Democrat. We all know why Biden picked him for the post, was simply
msfiddlestix
Feb 29
#106
Look...it is what it is... It's not over. All of this hand wringing and blame is simply not good for all of us.
Chakaconcarne
Feb 29
#108
He always seemed he'd be a thoughtful SCJ, but weak as a prosecutor. I really did not
TeamProg
Feb 29
#111
You know Garland and Monaco weren't confirmed for a couple of months, right?
Fiendish Thingy
Feb 29
#140
and the marginally or ill-informed voters won't think any of it matters, cuz no trials were concluded
Evolve Dammit
Feb 29
#118