Discussion: McConnell: I Will Not Bring A Mueller Protection Bill Up For A Senate Vote

3 Likes

Thanks for making it clear you’re a f**king traitor, Mitch.

55 Likes

Trump is the GOP and the GOP is Trump. This should be the Democrats’ bloody shirt until the Republican Party gives up the ghost.

44 Likes

Why would he sign it? He wouldn’t have to, Mitch. It would get enough votes for an override. But I probably don’t need to explain how the Senate works to you.

61 Likes

16 Likes

It benefits dirty players to let Trump fire Mueller. The ensuing turmoil is useful to them. McConnell is dirty, and so are his friends.

49 Likes

“I don’t think the President is going to do that. And just as a practical matter, even if we passed it, why would he sign it?” McConnell said.

Pass it anyway as a signal to the president that Republicans stand for the rule of law, oh chinless one.

52 Likes

Way to stand up for the rule of law, Mitch. Nice work.

33 Likes

McTurtle stays with party before country:
Refusing to consider the bill allows him and his caucus to avoid going on the record as voting against it.

32 Likes

Isn’t there some Article I provision for a veto-proof bill or did the invention of Twitter invalidate that?

17 Likes

Utterly and absolutely contemptible.

47 Likes

Of course you won’t you traitorous fucker.

52 Likes

“He reiterated his previous claims that such legislation is not necessary and that there is ‘no indication’ that President Trump would fire Mueller…”

“…beyond the fact that he already ordered White House Counsel Don McGahn to fire Mueller.”

There’s a Great Reckoning coming, Mitch.

And neither you nor any of the other cornered rats in the GOP are going to escape it.

63 Likes

The chelonian senator from Kentucky never disappoints

7 Likes

His day will come and he won’t be able to escape the consequences of his cynical inaction.
.

21 Likes

Scary sad situation.

9 Likes

So…the President would never sign a bill forbidding him from firing Mueller. Which is why there’s no point in having legislation protecting the special counsel from being capriciously fired by the President? Ok, I guess that’s logic. Of a certain kind.

14 Likes

“I don’t think the President is going to do that. And just as a practical matter, even if we passed it, why would he sign it?”

LOL! Round and round the mulberry bush, GOPer “logic” chased true reason…

HE’D SIGN IT BECAUSE, AS YOU’VE SAID, HE HAS NO INTENTION OF FIRING MUELLER.

41 Likes

And, this would be because, and forgive me for shouting, HE’S COMPLICIT! COMPLICIT! GODDAMN COM-FUCKING-COMPLICIT!

That thing where he torpedoed the one best chance to get a grip on this by refusing to join in a bipartisan denunciation and threatening to denounce the whole IC case as a partisan attack? Yeah, funny about that. It was like a panic reaction. A think which we seem to have seen a lot–like Hannity’s panic reaction about being outed as Cohen’s client and the malevolent Confederate house elf’s blurted-out response to Franken’s question.

Whether McConnell was an accessory before or after the fact remains to be discovered, but he’s acted from the very start, in January, 2017, like a man terrified a special counsel investigation would end with feds on his doorstep with a warrant.

Of course he wants to preserve Trump’s “Destruct” button. Because even if it’s use takes down Turmp, it may kill the investigation before it gets to him.

63 Likes

Evil, corrupt snake. Treasonous bastard.

23 Likes