• EscanortheArrogant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    90
    ·
    5 months ago

    “Speaker of the House of Representatives Mike Johnson dismissed the plan as part of Democrats’ “ongoing efforts to delegitimize the Supreme Court.”

    Pretty sure the current members of the supreme court are delegitimizing it all by themselves.

    • Bone@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      5 months ago

      Of course, but this is what they do to steal the argument and turn it around on the legitimately wronged.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    5 months ago

    “erode rule of law” says guy who wanted to overturn an election and whose party is currently advancing the first convicted felon nominee and backing “Project 2025” which proposes to absolutely dynamite “rule of law”

    I’m sorry but Republiklans can’t use that line anymore.

      • chuckleslord@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        No, it isn’t. Whataboutism is pointing to a different wrong as a way to dismiss a currently discussed wrong. This is using someone’s past actions as a reason they shouldn’t be trusted in their current statement. It’s a legitimate attack on the speaker’s ethos.

        • yetiftw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          24
          ·
          5 months ago

          but it functions as a whataboutism. it doesn’t address the original concerns of the statement. instead it uses an ad hominem attach to discredit the argument

          • Fedizen@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            8
            ·
            5 months ago

            If this were a debate he’s making an argument that he’s denied the underlying principle of: eg arguing the “sky is blue” after saying “blue doesn’t exist”. I’m pointing out that this is a nonsensical statement in the context it was given.

            • yetiftw@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              18
              ·
              5 months ago

              how is a concern about upending precedent a nonsensical statement? the source of an argument does not impact its validity as a point

      • OnlyJabs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is not a whataboutism, this is calling someone out, and their party out, for their hypocrisy.

        • yetiftw@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          21
          ·
          5 months ago

          but it functions as a whataboutism. it doesn’t address the original concerns of the statement. instead it uses an ad hominem attach to discredit the argument

          • gamermanh@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            it doesn’t address the original concerns of the statement

            Yes, it does. The statements concerns were bullshit fakery, as proven by the points given.

      • ayyy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        This is gaslighting

  • DancingBear@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    5 months ago

    Republicans literally voted against their own immigration reform.

    If Biden really wants to pass this reform, he has to come out and say that he is against it, then all the republicans will wax poetic about how important Supreme Court reform is, then they vote on it….

  • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    5 months ago

    “Nooo! Don’t take steps to foil our plot to abolish democracy! Not Fair! 😭😭😭”

    – Republicans right now

  • Media Bias Fact Checker@lemmy.worldB
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    19
    ·
    5 months ago
    Voice of America Media Bias Fact Check Credibility: [High] (Click to view Full Report)

    Voice of America is rated with High Creditability by Media Bias Fact Check.

    Bias: Least Biased
    Factual Reporting: High
    Country: United States of America
    Full Report: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-america/

    Check the bias and credibility of this article on Ground.News


    Thanks to Media Bias Fact Check for their access to the API.
    Please consider supporting them by donating.

    Footer

    Media Bias Fact Check is a fact-checking website that rates the bias and credibility of news sources. They are known for their comprehensive and detailed reports.

    Beep boop. This action was performed automatically. If you dont like me then please block me.💔
    If you have any questions or comments about me, you can make a post to LW Support lemmy community.