Perhaps they are exercising Alinsky’s rule about “Accusing your opponent of acts that you yourself have been committing.”
Democrats are outraged that Republicans are planning on objecting to the certification of electoral votes. It’s “conspiracy and fantasy,” says Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.Hmm, seems Chuck forgot about those Democrat challenges. He can’t claim he knew nothing about it because he was in office at the time, after all.
“The effort by the sitting President of the United States to overturn the results is patently undemocratic,” the New York Democrat said. “The effort by others to amplify and burnish his ludicrous claims of fraud is equally revolting.”
“This is America. We have elections. We have results. We make arguments based on the fact and reason—not conspiracy and fantasy,” he added.
There’s only one problem with Chucky’s “argument based on fact and reason.” Democrats have been challenging the electoral vote certification for 2 decades.
The last three times a Republican has been elected president — Trump in 2016 and George W. Bush in both 2000 and 2004 — Democrats in the House have brought objections to the electoral votes in states the GOP nominee won. In early 2005 specifically, Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., along with Rep. Stephanie Tubbs, D-Ohio, objected to Bush’s 2004 electoral votes in Ohio.
Or maybe he did forget.
He seems to have chosen to forget that he single-handedly caused the failure of Indymac Bank by mouthing off on TV that they were on the verge of failure, even though they were not. (They were having some difficulties but weren’t anywhere near failure...until Chuck released confidential information to the public.) It caused a $3 billion+ run on the bank and the bank then failed. Of course back then Senator Schumer claimed that he did not cause the failure of the bank, even though he did cause it. If anyone else had revealed that confidential information they would have been arrested, charged, and tried for that action. But Chuck got a pass because he’s a senator, and specifically, a Democrat senator. That it caused between $4 billion and $8 billion in losses for the bank and depositors didn’t seem to bother Chuck at all.
To quote the CNBC report, “Why would a New York Senator attack a Pasadena bank, acting as some sort of amateur, self-appointed, long-distance bank examiner?” Because he could.
And so it is that he’s also forgotten the Democrats’ challenges to Electoral College certifications.
I have to wonder what color the sky is on the planet Chuck Schumer is from?
What about the rest of the Democrat faithful? Do they also have the same kind of memory issue regarding challenges of Electoral College certification? It appears they do, reading what they’ve said about it all.
Then there’s New Hampshire’s own Senator Jeanne Shaheen (D-NH) who says a constitutional mechanism being used by Senator Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Representative Mo Brook “borders on sedition or treason”. Really?
Yet, over a perfectly good and legal mechanism, due to someone willing to stand politically to your Chosen Ones (Dementia Joe and the Powers that will be actually wielded by Commie Kamala), you want Republicans in front of a firing squad...To answer the question: No, she did not. That kind of thing only goes one way.
--snip--
Yeah, just another lying politician where Power is the only thing that matters. And you’ll whatever you have to gain and keep it. Happy New Year. Aren’t you the angry one. Along with Senator Chris Murphy, that unhinged Democrat from CT – why, it’s almost like talking points being passed around freely – and undermining our Republic in a more insidious way. But then again, Power.
BTW, dear, did you say the same thing when then Democrat US Senator Barbara Boxer did the same thing in 2004?