- Thread starter
- #41
Are you freaking kidding me here? Look, Polosi's objection to Jordan, and Banks were disingenuous at best. She just didn't want any opposition to the narrative Democrats wanted to cement into the public's minds....And, she violated house rules to do it...Plus, she didn't want to testify about her actions that day, but the truth will come out, it always does.It didn't have to be "one sided" at all. The republicans wanted to talk about a host of unrelated side issues to distract from the focus of the investigation or they were not going to participate. A lack of good faith and due diligence is an excellent reason to deny a member a seat on any committee.
But, you as much as confirm it right here in your post...Things you call "unrelated issues" are the epitome of not wanting the whole picture...You believe that Trump was the all evil, man child that couldn't take losing, and to some extent you're right about that....But, then again, Hillary told Biden if he lost not to concede...Would that have been a coup as well?
Today's progressive Democrats are doing what they always do, overplay their hand, and lying about events when they don't fit the narrative they want projected to the people...