Once Again Republicans Blink and Sellout to Democrats

I'm coming around to think that Mitch McConnell must be voted out of the Senate and replaced by another (conservative) Republican.

The first recent spark that prompts me think this way is that the proposed bipartisan Senate immigration bill would essentially legitimize the entry of illegal immigrants into the US instead of actually closing the border if passed into law. This implies that both Schumer and McConnell worked cooperatively together. Working together is normally a good thing, but in this case McConnell appears to have blown-off the requests from conservative Republicans that the border be closed.

This thread was triggered by the following article: 18 GOP Senators Help Democrats Pass Bloated Spending Package, 3 Did Not Vote. See the first post in this thread. McConnell was accused of betraying Republican fiscal interests.

Today, on the Mark Levine's show, Ted Cruz explicitly pointed out that McConnell had refused to provide financial re-election assistance to certain Republicans, one of whom was Cruz. Cruz called on McConnell to resign.

Previously, the expected 2022 "red-wave" fizzled. Following that disaster, rumors started to materialize that McConnell refused to help certain conservative Republicans with their election efforts as McConnell believed that they would not support him as the Senate Leader. Essentially, McConnell preferred to purposely "lose" an election to Democrats just to retain his position as Senate Minority Leader. Republicans don't need this type of self-serving "leadership". Republicans need to take control of the Senate to implement a conservative Republican agenda.

As an associated observation: Republicans also need new leadership. Ronna McDaniel, still retained her position as head of the Republican National Committee Chair despite the "red-wave" fizzling.
 
The House did their part by removing the speaker. It is now time for the Senate to step up and get rid of McConnell.

Isn't it Ronna Romney McDaniel? She has followed in her uncle's footsteps. She got so much bad press she had to stop using her maiden name.
 
Interesting news, should this eventually transpire.
Additionally

The existing Republican leadership has failed to produce wins. Recently, what should have been an easy win that flopped was the now failed impeachment of Mayorkas. (Even if the impeachment succeeded, it would have been a useless win, since Biden Obama would have hired another mindless automaton to keep the border open.)

I would say, that the Republicans did not "defeat" the proposed Senate immigration bill. The Democrats have have once again played the Republicans for suckers. Schumer, I speculate, is actually very thrilled that the phony immigration bill is now essentially "dead". Democrats are all about optics not real solutions. The Democrats will now be able to endlessly propagandize that they tried to solve the border crisis (which they originally claimed did not exist) to now claim that the evil Republicans blocked the the desire of the valiant Democrats to secure the border.
 
Last edited:
Recently, what should have been an easy win that flopped was the now failed impeachment of Mayorkas.
It doesn't surprise me that Republicans are advocating for open borders. I predict they will cave on most of their "stated" core issues.
 
Yesterday I was reminded about George Santos getting expelled from the US House of Representatives since there will be a special election this coming week to elect a new representative. The concern is what do you do; when one side uses asymmetrical warfare?

Asymmetrical warfare, in this case, being when one side will use any means to achieve its objectives (Democrats) while the other side (Republicans) limits their response to certain rules (ethical integrity) which constrain their ability to achieve their objectives.

The Republicans have a very narrow majority in the House. The Democrats, in the Senate have a very narrow majority.

The expulsion of Santos from the House by fellow Republicans, based on raw partisanship, was suicidal. It reduced their ability to take action, such as the recent failure to impeach Mayorkas. Democrats, on the other hand, do not seem to be in a rush to expel Menendez from the Senate despite accusations that he has been involved in criminal activities. This allows the Democrats to maintain their majority to continue to implement their agenda with impunity.

The release of the Hur report documents that there is a two tier justice system. The report essentially concludes (like that of Comey's criminal findings concerning Hillary Clinton), that "no rationale prosecutor" would bring the charges forward. In the case of Biden, the assertion is made that we need to have sympathy for the cognitively challenged Biden. Therefor prosecution of Biden, even though he committed criminal acts, is not warranted.

In the case of Trump, who is essentially being charged with the same type of "crimes" as Biden, the prosecutor (Jack Smith) has demonstrated no sympathy for Trump. In fact the prosecutor is going out of his way to contort the law in highly questionable aggressive manner to charge Trump with a vast number of criminal and civil violations.

The Democrats practice asymmetrical warfare and will do whatever it takes (illegal and/or unethical) to remain in power.
 
The release of the Hur report generated a great deal of noise. Lost in that cacophony, is that Biden "stole" classified documents while he was a Senator. At the time, he was not suffering from dementia. Consequently, Hur should still have pursued legal charges against Biden at that time since it demonstrated "a mental state of willfulness."
 
It is good he is stepping down. It can't happen soon enough. But the Senate is full of old RINO "bulls" so his replacement is unlikely to be any better if he is another never-Trumper like McConnell was.
 
The FBI has proved itself to be corrupt. When I see all the people who lied to the FISA court perp-walked, then - if and only if, there are strong deterrents for misuse - would I be in favor or backing this provision. The bull:poop: of the sacrificial lamb is just that. bull:poop:. There needs to be actual deterrents to stop the FBI and other agencies from spying on Americans. The 4th amendment trumps this foolish bill.
 
Republicans cave once again. Democrats get everything they want? I don't know of any concessions by the Democrats?
  • Republicans have not received any support from the Democrats for closing the US border and deporting the illegal immigrants. Yet the Democrats (falsely) claim they want to solve the border issue. Clearly the Democrats don't want the illegal immigration solved since they won't make an offer as a compromise to Republicans.
  • The proposed bill evidently grants so-called humanitarian aid to Gaza. That keeps Hamas supplied so that they can continue their terrorism. The US is funding Hamas. You don't fight a war by giving aid to your enemy. This humanitarian aid will cause more suffering and death.
Yes, Republicans have the slimiest possible majority, nevertheless it is frustrating that Republicans, in the spirit of (false) compromise let the Democrats have their way. Giving into Democratic demands is not compromise.
 
Republicans cave once again. Democrats get everything they want? I don't know of any concessions by the Democrats?


I'm voting for Trump because ⬇️ isn't working.

download.jpg
 
With the Trump shooting and the Republican convention, the Menendez story got overlooked.
The significance of this story is that it displays two standards of ethics and also the stupidity of Republicans.
  • The Republicans sanctimoniously expelled Santos (even though he was not charged with a crime) from the House thereby jeopardizing their majority.
  • The Democrats on the other hand will retain, a now convicted felon, in the Senate to guarantee their majority.
 
With the Trump shooting and the Republican convention, the Menendez story got overlooked.
by who?


The Republicans sanctimoniously expelled Santos (even though he was not charged with a crime)
Charged, not yet convicted.

The Democrats on the other hand will retain, a now convicted felon, in the Senate to guarantee their majority.
I suppose you don't see the irony in this statement.
 
I suppose you don't see the irony in this statement

I think being convicted of 200 years sentence worth of corruption with mountains of evidence is just a little bit different than Trump's situation
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom