Lord Ludd
Lord Ludd's JournalJudging from the surge in Covid cases after many states reopened prematurely,
imagine what the numbers would look like had we not gone into lockdown, flawed as it was, a couple months ago.
Had Murka remained open for business as usual in April & May, we'd be at multiples of the current number of daily cases & deaths.
Has even one of the troglodytes, Neanderthals, imbeciles, incompetents, mental defectives, low-IQ morans, greedy bastards, "freedom" lovers & sociopaths in DC, the media or the general pop. who vehemently opposed the lockdown come forward publicly & admitted they were wrong, BIG TIME?
Of course not. Silly question.
What Democrats, liberals, progressives, moderates, The Lincoln Project, Never-Trumpers, Rational Republicans (is that an oxymoron?) & anyone else acquainted with reality need to do is remind voters very loudly & constantly that Trump & his nest of vipers opposed the lockdown with every fiber of their miserable, twisted souls & that it was the governors & mayors -- Dems aggressively & 'Pubs reluctantly -- who brought things to a halt, saving tens of thousands of lives & preventing hundreds of thousands of cases of a sometimes deadly & often-disabling disease.
And also remind voters that it was overwhelmingly the Rethug governors who reopened prematurely, imperiling the lives of their constituents & of us all.
If Bill Clinton could be compelled to testify under oath before a grand jury
about a BJ & then get impeached for lying to the grand jury about said BJ, why can't Drumpf also be compelled to testify under oath (to Congress, to the FBI, name your venue) about whether or not he committed the clearly treasonous act of betraying the military, next to which Ukraine pales in comparison (relatively speaking) as a matter of national security?
I'm aware that Clinton's testimony was connected to Paula Jones's civil suit, while the current affair has no legal action attached to it (yet), but heavens to betsy, gosh & golly, holy fuck, we've got to amend the constitution to require a sitting president to potentially perjure him- or herself in the case of a High Crime such as this, where impeachment AND REMOVAL will surely follow. (And no 5th Amendment for you, Mr./Madam President.)
In the meantime, can't someone with standing (like maybe all the troops in Afghanistan) sue the fucker & make him testify under oath?
Profile Information
Member since: Sun Feb 9, 2020, 10:31 PMNumber of posts: 585
