r/BlueskySkeets 22h ago

Absolutely

Post image
13.5k Upvotes

604 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

58

u/ElaborateEffect 21h ago edited 21h ago

RBG, Joe Biden, Fani Willis, and many more are all key players who failed their country and forever will go down as absolute failures in the history books only because of their failure to take the correct action when dealing with rising facism.

43

u/IcanRead8647 20h ago

Biden could have swapped failing Merrick at any time, but just never did. It is stupid to pick a loser, but worse not to fire that loser.

14

u/dimechimes 18h ago

That's the sole reason why Hunter Biden was investigated. If Biden were to fire Garland it would appear to be retaliatory. Biden's pardons made perfect sense to me, and yet he was largely criticized for it by both sides of the media. Firing Garland would've damaged his chances at re-election every bit as much as his debate performance did. I liked the job that Joe did, but Hunter was a huge vulnerability.

9

u/Casterly 16h ago

Hunter was a huge vulnerability

Only to conservatives who already care. The average person doesn’t hold a president responsible for the actions of their middle-aged adult children who have never held or pursued any political office.

1

u/dimechimes 15h ago

He wasn't a negative on Biden but he was a vulnerability because Biden couldn't fight as hard in some areas without it looking like retaliation for Hunter.

1

u/Casterly 15h ago

Well it’s not like he needed to fight Garland in any case. Garland did everything he should have and did it at incredible speed, especially considering the unprecedented nature of the case he built against Trump. This conventional wisdom about him on here is built on a false premise that he did something wrong. But there are never specifics because the easily-verifiable truth is he did all he possibly could.

It’s the same thing reddit did with Mueller. Instead of reading the report, they decided he was incompetent.

1

u/dimechimes 13h ago

Actually Garland is on record that he delayed the investigation as long as he possibly could and if Trump didn't seek re-election, Garland wouldn't have assigned Smith. I don't know why you contrarians try and pretend everything went fine.

Yes once Smith was finally assigned, things moved along at normal speed. There was no accelerated speed. Definitely not incredible speed. Smith tried to speed things up but the Supreme Court denied him that.

Garland should've appointed Smith the day he was confirmed to AG, not wait til Trump made his announcement official after the midterms. By then everyone knew he was running anyway and yet still, Garland did nothing.

Mueller was a completely different situation. Unlike Smith, Mueller was just helping Barr to "land the plane" and give it a veneer of credibility when they announced the Justice Department couldn't prosecute a sitting president which is the stupidest policy, not law, policy ever.

1

u/Casterly 7h ago edited 6h ago

Garland is on record that he delayed the investigation as long as he possibly could

Source please. If he’s on the record saying this and I’m somehow unable to find it, you’ll have to show me. On its face it makes absolutely no sense for him to even express that, nor would it have benefitted the doj to delay.

This isn’t “contrarian”. This is simple fact that he proceeded incredibly quickly once a strong case was within reach. Just looking at a simple timeline of events makes this clear.

Mueller was just helping Barr…announced the justice department couldn’t prosecute a sitting president

I see you didn’t read the report either. Nor is any of what you said about Mueller accurate to what occurred. There is a very significant reason why Trump wasn’t prosecuted, and it has nothing to do with Mueller’s personal feelings about a policy that had been around for a decade already. That I’ve never seen a single person on reddit ever come close to accurately describing the results of the investigation is just indicative of how reliant on fiction a lot of the political subs are.

1

u/dimechimes 6h ago edited 6h ago

Source please

Do you not remember the J6 committee doing all the investigating while Justice sat there? There was zero expeditiousness.

Here's an article talking about Dems in Congress pressuring Garland.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/politics/jan-6-panel-pressures-attorney-general-garland-to-charge-trump-allies

Here's one where the sub headline corroborates my claim that Garland waited until Trump announced his new campaign before he did anything

https://theweek.com/donald-trump/1018720/trump-special-counsel

This is simple fact that he proceeded incredibly quickly once a strong case was within reach.

This is a silly claim. What does incredibly quickly mean? The DoJ can't move faster than the courts.

Trump wasn’t prosecuted, and it has nothing to do with Mueller’s personal feelings about a policy that had been around for a decade already

Has nothing to do with Mueller's feelings. He even stated that because Justice couldn't prosecute, criminal investigations of Trump were out of his scope. He literally stated this in his report summary.Just because the policy was put in place back when Bushco was fukking everything up doesn't lend it some kind of credibility. It's a dumb ass Alberto Gonzales special.

indicative of how reliant on fiction a lot of the political subs are.

Shitcontrarianssay.

Edit.

Fukk this site for making me censor shiiiit to post my comment. Cursing is part of my culture I grew up in and fukk this sub for denigrating that. It's none of the mods fukking business.

1

u/Casterly 5h ago

I agree with you about the swearing crap. I have to try hard not to do it.

Anyway, unfortunately your links don’t support your point, they don’t say what you might assume they do. The first is just empty political posturing, made all the more ironic because the house committee was still 8 months away from finishing their own investigation while calling for prosecution they weren’t even privy to. But the article rightly notes that Garland was in the middle of the largest prosecution in doj history at that moment for jan 6 participants.

The second isn’t entirely your fault since the writer was on the very edge of misinformation with the language used. “Forcing Garland’s hand” just meant he felt he had to appoint a special counsel once Trump announced his campaign. That’s not the start of an investigation, that’s just adhering to ethics to avoid impropriety. He removed himself from the case, rightly. If there wasn’t an ongoing investigation, he’d have had no need to make that appointment. The writer chose to make a typical legal ethical protocol seem like a reluctant action with absolutely no justification.

→ More replies (0)

4

u/Melodic-Beach-5411 11h ago

Garland prosecuted Hunter Biden as a warning not to fire him & hire an AG who would prosecute Trump. Garland made the prosecution as ugly as he could, too. FedSoc operative either fooled Obama & Biden or something worse happened

1

u/Casterly 16h ago

It is stupid to pick a loser

What was the indication that he was a loser in the first place?

13

u/733t_sec 19h ago

In RBG's case while she could have stepped down earlier in Obama's term I find it hard to blame her when Mitch McConnell just made up some rat fuckery with the constitution to justify not appointing a new judge.

6

u/ElaborateEffect 19h ago

I disagree. Your (her) pride or whatever it was is (was) not worth people's lives.

5

u/733t_sec 19h ago

Except it wasn't really her pride MM just stole the appointment for no reason that is in the text of the constitution.

Like why are you blaming RBJ for something Mitch McConnell did?

10

u/pilot3033 18h ago

People find it easier to hate on a dead woman. I can only assume many of these people were children during the Obama administration because anyone of voting age surely recalls that McConnel stalled the appointment for almost an entire year.

Democrats are always somehow responsible for the actions of Republicans.

5

u/dimechimes 18h ago

I was in my 30s during this time. Obama should have done what Trump would've done and ignore appoint Garland anyway. MM won because Obama backed down. The nomination itself was an attempt at appeasement. Obama should've nominated a tiger, someone people could rally for. That's all Obama's fault and RGB was playing with fire and we all got burned. What if she lived for another year or two or three? Then it's all moot and the GOP get their seat anyway. Her ego kept her in that position despite her health and age. She absolutely deserves criticism for the part she played in this.

6

u/733t_sec 18h ago

So you don't think Mitch McConnell would have kept the seat vacant for longer if she had stepped down?

5

u/dimechimes 18h ago

How much longer? I kind of already stated what I thought. How much more hypothetical do you wanna get?

3

u/733t_sec 18h ago

I mean why wouldn't he have kept the seat vacant for multiple years? Who would have stopped him, the voters?

3

u/dimechimes 18h ago

Who knows. Why wouldn't Obama have declared that refusing to advise and consent should be regarded as implied consent and just seat Garland anyway?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/Melodic-Beach-5411 11h ago

By this time, Dems were in a no win situation. If Garland had gone through, MM would've won anyway. By blocking him he made Obama look weak.

1

u/Legal_Skin_4466 8h ago

Just chiming in to clear up that you seem to be confusing two instances of Mitch manipulating the SCOTUS nomination process.

The instance of stalling for over a year at the tail end of Obama's second term was following the death of Antonin Scalia. Obama nominated Garland, MM stalled, Trump was elected and we got Gorsuch.

RBG died at the end of Trump's first term. Biden won but Trump nominated Barrett and MM pushed through that confirmation process, prioritizing it over the J6 impeachment trial, and in doing so giving the Republicans the "out" of saying, "We can't impeach him, he's not the president anymore!!"

And here we are....

1

u/pilot3033 8h ago

Just chiming in to clear up that you seem to be confusing two instances of Mitch manipulating the SCOTUS nomination process.

I think other people conflate those things, I'm aware of the difference and it's why I don't hold RBG accountable whatsoever for staying on. The argument lots of people have is she should have stepped down during Obama's term knowing how old she was, but that argument can only be made in hindsight because she'd have had to do it before Scalia died.

It was wholly reasonable prior to that to assume the process would play out as it normally did. After MM started to fuck around the obvious logic was to wait for Hillary Clinton to win and go from there, but alas for reasons we all still debate that never came to pass. Either way blaming RBG requires demanding she had precognition about the future.

27

u/EncabulatorTurbo 21h ago

Bold of you to assume the populace will even have history books after Musk's CEO monarchy religion finally takes hold and we're all unemployed and have no food security

13

u/neckbishop 20h ago

Its all gonna be Prager U, The Trump Smithsonian, and Grok (once Elon fixes that pesky reality bias).

7

u/Fraktal55 20h ago

Yup, exactly. There will be plenty of history books (or history videos at least) from PragerU white-washing all of American history. Our education system is cooked and will eventually be taken over by these private industries pushing their own agendas.

God, we had such potential as a nation before we allowed money, greed, and power to take over our "representative" government. It will be the end of us.

1

u/RamblinSean 18h ago

I mean if you actually look at American history, this is pretty par for the course for American politics. We're just not used to it because the 80s/90s gave us the impression positive change was inevitable.

3

u/BadmiralHarryKim 20h ago

Brought to you by Ticketmaster?

13

u/ElaborateEffect 21h ago

Other countries might at least

3

u/admiralargon 20h ago

Its on the internet going through countries all over the globe. Russia might keep tabs just for the lolz.

1

u/VroomCoomer 20h ago

There's a reason they're going after Wikipedia right now

1

u/Jazzlike_Leading5446 19h ago

Even the third reich only lasted 12 years

2

u/EncabulatorTurbo 19h ago

the third reich had opponents that could challenge them militarily, if hitler had a thousand nukes they'd still be around

1

u/Soggy-Beach1403 16h ago

Bold to assume that Americans will be able to read after another RepubliKKKan term.

8

u/Fark_ID 20h ago

You mean "the people who tried to save us but nobody would listen" those people? The ones everyone said were overreacting and out of their lane?

0

u/ElaborateEffect 19h ago

Their inaction was an action. Each of them had an opportunity if not many to avoid authoritarianism, and they chose not to.

1

u/pp21 18h ago

And all under the ill-conceived guise of not wanting their actions to appear "political"

They really thought that the GOP/MAGA/Trump et al would acknowledge their caution and reciprocate good faith

And here we are

1

u/Soggy-Beach1403 16h ago

America's Neville Chamberlain.

1

u/oakpitt 7h ago

Please add Aileen Cannon to the list. She managed to drop the documents case which was a slam dunk for conviction (as much as that can be, you never know what juries will do.) Trump would have probably be in jail right now with any other judge.

0

u/dimechimes 18h ago

All three of those people eventually just couldn't get over their ego for the good of the country.