Exactly.
I remember Mitch saying that the reason he voted against the second impeachment was that he felt Trump's Jan 6 crimes would be better adjucated in criminal court. And before that, I remember Linsday saying that if Trump wins the GOP nomination in 2016, the GOP will get "destroyed.... and we'll deserve it".
Never underestimate the ability of Republican voters to enthusiastically vote against their interests....
Yes, Puerto Rico is a US Territory and while it is not one of the 50 states, Puerto Ricans are still American citizens
Yeah, doesn't mshta run JavaScript locally on Windows? This looks like a way to force you to run their script
I hope that URL isn't the real one, you don't want anyone trying it just to see what would happen
He can ask for them back, but El Salvador doesn't have to listen. It's like when you sell a car, once the title is signed over and you get the money the deal is done. You can always say "that was a mistake, can I have the car back" but the other party can just ignore you.
And yes, it sickens me to be writing about humans like property you can just "transfer the title" for. But it must not have the same effect on Trump, Musk, or Rubio.
Shit, now he will never win another election
Don't misgender him....
BUTT TIZZY MALES!!!!
I don't understand why some in this thread are so offended when it's noted that it's not a Filibuster, because it's not blocking a vote. It doesn't matter what we call it. He's doing this to get some attention to certain issues, and it's working. In many ways, it's better that he does it when no critical vote is pending, because he can't be accused of obstructionism.
People need to understand that, as the minority party in the Senate, all Democrats can really do is obstruct. And Republicans are counting on that obstruction, because it makes it easier to tear shit down. If Democrats simply refuse to let anything come to the floor, Republicans will just wait until the entire government defaults, and then blame it all on Democrats.
Democrats need to pick their battles carefully, and I think Booker did a good job here. Whether or not is actually blocks votes is besides the point.
... Thanks for linking to a source which confirms my interpretation, you did my work for me!
the term filibuster was first used in the 1850s when it was applied to efforts to hold the Senate floor in order to prevent a vote on a bill.
The Senate does not have a time limit on any speech like other bodies do. One a Senator has the floor, they can keep talking until they yield the floor.
A traditional Filibuster is when a Senator does this to postpone a particular vote. Since there was no vote pending, technically this doesn't count as a Filibuster. Which means Booker can get the press coverage for doing this, without really holding up anything important.
Not everyone, just people who weren't born here. Or people who were, but who don't look like they were. Or, people who just don't "look right"....
Yeah, no way We're letting a long haired, bearded freak into our church....
Silly Rabbit! Accountability is for Liberals!