“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.
“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.
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
If this were a debate he’s making an argument that he’s denied the underlying principle of: eg arguing the “sky is blue” after saying “blue doesn’t exist”. I’m pointing out that this is a nonsensical statement in the context it was given.
how is a concern about upending precedent a nonsensical statement? the source of an argument does not impact its validity as a point
The context makes the statement ironic and unserious.
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
And your whining about a whataboutism is itself a red herring. It’s dragging the point away from what it was originally.
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.
This is gaslighting
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….
“Nooo! Don’t take steps to foil our plot to abolish democracy! Not Fair! 😭😭😭”
– Republicans right now
Voice of America Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)
Voice of America is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.
Bias: Least Biased
Factual Reporting: High
Country: United States of America
Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-america/Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News
Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
Please consider supporting them by donating.Footer
Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.
Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.I feel like “Republican objections” is kinda redundant here.
Fuck those red raiding remedials and git er dun son
