“We need to shut the border.… The president could take executive action to do it today—doesn’t need more money. It needs action, and this is what’s disappointing to people, and that’s why Mayorkas is gonna pay this public relations price by being impeached for the first time since 1876,” Hill said.
Notably absent from Hill’s explanation was any description of high crimes and misdemeanors committed by Mayorkas. Hill all but admitted that, with the impeachment, Republicans are aiming to make Mayorkas the face of their anti-Biden, anti-immigrant campaign, despite his having not committed impeachable offenses.”

120 points

Great. He gave away the game. At least 40% of Americans are going to get played. Giving up the game has no consequences. Ask freakin’ Christopher Rufo if explaining his unreasonable strategy against critical race theory hurts him in anyway. Ask Steve Bannon. Ask Donald “Aspiring Dictator For A Day” Trump. Ask Steven Miller.

The game was given up a long time ago and we’re still playin’ it.

permalink
report
reply
74 points

Jordan Klepper did a segment on The Daily Show last night (it’s on YouTube) where he talked to Trump people and they want a dictator or a king. They come right out and say it.

permalink
report
parent
reply
42 points

And im sure they all still fancy themselves “patriots”.

permalink
report
parent
reply
22 points

Lol it’s doesn’t help that Klepper strings them along until they agree with something absurd, but…those folks clearly haven’t a democratic bone in their body

permalink
report
parent
reply
-94 points

To be fair, most Democrats do too. They just want a dictator that is going to do the things they want, like banning certain forms of speech, or taxing billionaires out of existence.

Not many people really, truly want a lost constitutional framework where a consensus needs to be reached, and compromises made, in order to do things.

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points

most Democrats do too. They just want a dictator that is going to do the things they want,

[Citation needed]

The user doth projects too much.

permalink
report
parent
reply
32 points

banning certain forms of speech

Democrats aren’t the ones on a book banning crusade.

Nice attempt at a both-sides though.

permalink
report
parent
reply
20 points

This is such a strange take. Just because people think that the current system doesn’t work doesn’t mean they automatically jump to wanting despotism even if enlightened. People who throw up their hands at political gridlock and see it as a justification for dictatorship, and not as reasons to iterate and improve upon the existing system are weirdos.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

Why do you believe this to be the case?

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

They just want a dictator that is going to do the things they want

“They” being the majority of Americans. We want a constitutional framework that benefits everyone, not just a select few. That’s not wanting a dictatorship, it’s quite the opposite. Democrats and Republicans Are. Not. The. Same.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

The fuck you talkin about. Gtfo with that democrats do too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

You are forgetting about peaceful transition of power being a Democrat policy

permalink
report
parent
reply
90 points

The real “game” here is that they are trying to downplay the seriousness of impeachment. Because their orange clown was impeached twice.

So they’ll “impeach” anyone they think they can get away with to score points with their ignorant base and to make it seems less serious.

It’s really shitty and un-American.

permalink
report
reply
7 points

Yeah I really think this is it. I’m sure it was another directive from Trump to get more impeachments so he can muddy the waters at the rallies. I’m a little surprised they haven’t drummed up a Biden impeachment yet so he can prance around with that one too.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

That’s simple and evil enough that it may just work.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

It works like a charm.

Go to a GOP state right now and ask 100 people who Mayorkas is. I will give $100 for every response that is little more than a confused look.

Now go to those same GOP voters in about 24 hours, after they’ve gotten their daily dose of Fox News and Trump’s dollar-store-twitter knock-off. I’ll give you another $100 for every response that isn’t how suddenly Mayorkas is the root of all evil and the source of all their problems and needs to be impeached because orange man said so.

These people are lemmings who believe the last thing Trump tells them.

permalink
report
parent
reply
47 points

This was done for multiple reasons:

  • Rile up the voting base – people who 24 hours ago couldn’t pronounce the name Mayorkas, let alone know who the hell he was – and paint him as the GOP’s new boogeyman. Make him the face of the anti-immigration movement spearheaded by a MAGA base that hates brown people by default.
  • Attempt to make it look like the GOP is “doing something” about the border
  • De-value impeachment as a check on executive overreach, turning it into just another partisan tool that can be safely ignored by the general public as “no big deal”
  • Take the focus off of Trump and everything he’s saying and doing.

“We need to shut the border.… The president could take executive action to do it today—doesn’t need more money. It needs action, and this is what’s disappointing to people, and that’s why Mayorkas is gonna pay this public relations price by being impeached for the first time since 1876,”

So if Biden could have done it through an EO, why not just write up and pass a bill that has everything you’d want the EO to have? Oh, that’s right. The Senate just did that and you rejected it out of hand because the orange man told you to. If Trump had blessed the exact same bill, you’d have been standing in front of a pulpit popping the champagne bottle while some old hag screams at random people to shut up. Fucking tool.

permalink
report
reply
41 points

They just voted against the border security bill that they supported and wanted, and now they’re trying to blame someone else.

permalink
report
reply
8 points
*

Yep… Blame shifting, rationalizing unwillingness to take responsibility, strip targets of agency, and cause their base, who are children, to internalize this as immutable truth

permalink
report
parent
reply
24 points

No, he didn’t “accidentally” say the reason. He just said they’re doing it “for political vandalism and fuck you too“.

They’ve been right out front with their unfiltered racist hateful shit-for-brains garbage for almost a decade now. And yet we still see these headlines like “Oops! RepubliQan Guy Accidentally Says Deeply Offensive Thing” witha bunch of “oooooh those terrible republiQans!” comments. We are stuck. In republican hell.

permalink
report
reply

politics

!politics@lemmy.world

Create post

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That’s all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

Community stats

  • 13K

    Monthly active users

  • 15K

    Posts

  • 428K

    Comments