Y'all DO realize that some of the Harris-Biden fights here are eerily similar to the 2016 battles

we later learned were cultivated and ginned up on Russian troll farms, right?

I mean, really - just look at the OPs on the first page of the forum. Just about every one of them is an attack on Harris or on Biden. And the threads are full of accusations and in-fighting between the two camps.

Why do you think that is? Because they’re seen as the FRONTRUNNERS.

And until a few days ago, Biden bore the brunt of these kinds of negative posts. But since the debate, Harris has now joined him as the target of head on and relentless attacks.

I recommend we scale back some of this in-fighting.

This isn’t a scold - I’ve been doing it, too. But a couple of days being offline gave me a perspective.

We need to chill and not fall right back into the trap being set for us.

If an elected official said I support gay marriage

as long as it's voluntary, i.e., the local government voluntarily issues licemses and recognized gay marriage, but I don't believe the federal government has any right to force local communities to perform or recognize same-sex marriage," would you think that's acceptable?

If not, do you understand why many people have an issue with his state's rights defense of his position on busing and why we are hoping he'll clarify where he stands?

I think the anger over the Harris- Biden exchange is not because she asked the question

but that he didn't answer it effectively.

I'm pretty sure that, had Harris raised the issue and asked the question just as she did and Biden was prepared and came back with a strong response, this would have been no big deal, people wouldn't be accusing Harris of "kneecapping" him or attacking her for "mischaracterizing" his record (which she didn't).

But Biden wasn't ready for the topic, even though he should have been, and created a problem for himself. When you're using state's rights as a defense, you've got some repair work to do ...

The problem wasn't that Harris brought up Biden's record in a debate. The problem is that Biden mishandled his response.

Not a fatal blow. But he needs to up his game.

If Bernie or Beto had challenged Biden the way Harris did, would people here be as angry with them

as they are with her?

Think about it carefully and honestly before you answer.

I love Joe Biden and don't have a favorite yet, so I feel comfortable saying

“No, Mr. Vice President. Just no. You to need to fix this. Stop talking and start listening - and not just to people who say they weren’t offended.”

Speaking of white privilege ...

An impeachment inquiry ISN'T the only way for the House to get secret grand jury material, after all

It’s been practically a mantra on DU, in the media, and elsewhere that Democrats MUST start impeachment because that's supposedly the only way for the House to obtain grand jury material.

Well, today, the House is scheduled to vote to authorize the Judiciary Committee Chairman to petition the court to obtain grand jury materials, on the basis that the Judiciary Committee is conducting hearings that are “preliminary” to a judicial proceeding and, therefore, a judge can disclose grand jury materials to them for this purpose. They actually quote the rule’s language in the bill to justify their request to obtain the materials even though an impeachment inquiry hasn’t been opened. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/BILLS-116hres430ih/xml/BILLS-116hres430ih.xml

This is exactly the basis described by a DUer who’s tried to push back on the “impeachment’s the only way” fallacy, only to be met with uniformed arguments, hostility, alerts, attacks on her expertise, credibility, motives and even the length of time she’s been on DU.

It’s nice to see her (and others of us who read the law the same way - as it’s written) proven correct, by no less than Chairman Nadler, the Judiciary Committee and the House.

"How come nobody told these stupid motherf#ckers I singlehandedly took down a president?"

A president must threaten bodily harm or engage in other criminality to be shown to have obstructed

justice?

Trump blasts "Deep State Tailor"