“Speaker of the House of Representatives Mike Johnson dismissed the plan as part of Democrats’ “ongoing efforts to delegitimize the Supreme Court.”
Pretty sure the current members of the supreme court are delegitimizing it all by themselves.
Of course, but this is what they do to steal the argument and turn it around on the legitimately wronged.
I feel like “Republican objections” is kinda redundant here.
Republicans literally voted against their own immigration reform.
If Biden really wants to pass this reform, he has to come out and say that he is against it, then all the republicans will wax poetic about how important Supreme Court reform is, then they vote on it….
“erode rule of law” says guy who wanted to overturn an election and whose party is currently advancing the first convicted felon nominee and backing “Project 2025” which proposes to absolutely dynamite “rule of law”
I’m sorry but Republiklans can’t use that line anymore.
not saying you’re wrong, but that is a whataboutism
No, it isn’t. Whataboutism is pointing to a different wrong as a way to dismiss a currently discussed wrong. This is using someone’s past actions as a reason they shouldn’t be trusted in their current statement. It’s a legitimate attack on the speaker’s ethos.
This is not a whataboutism, this is calling someone out, and their party out, for their hypocrisy.
but it functions as a whataboutism. it doesn’t address the original concerns of the statement. instead it uses an ad hominem attach to discredit the argument
it doesn’t address the original concerns of the statement
Yes, it does. The statements concerns were bullshit fakery, as proven by the points given.
