Bagginski
Well-Known Member
So, you were assuming AFTER the midterms, and AFTER a Red wave win? Maybe AFTER 1/20/23?For no reason or for any reason, it's all political theater, because judges hear cases if there any to be made and jury's convict. Impeaching Garland is like impeaching Biden, a political act, not a legal one, the same for congressional investigations when abused. I haven't seen the democrats abuse the system, but I've seen the republicans abuse it plenty and to the point of crippling the fixes put in place after Nixon to protect democracy. Garland would be a difficult person for them to deal with, he has the possibility of a November loss in mind and proceeds with caution anyway. All they need is a majority of the committee for a subpoena and a majority of the house to hold him in contempt. Obama's AG Holder defied one such a subpoena I believe.
If *that’s* the case, I can see why it wasn’t making sense, but if so, I think I disagree with you to this extent: it’s political theater ON ONE SIDE OF THE AISLE. If the other side of the aisle is not entirely of one mind, they largely take it as the existential threat that it is.
Maybe if I were better-versed in parliamentary politics, I’d understand better