• AdelleChattre (edited 8 years ago)
    +2
    @SMcIntyre -

    you're claiming as fact that no one will be confirmed to the Supreme Court between now and then

    Now you’re arguing for its own sake, I’m not ‘claiming’ that.

    Are you a time-traveler? Do you have visions of things to come?

    Yes. I’m a visitor from a strange realm we call “The Past.”

    it's absolutely too early to claim what Republicans will or won't do

    Quick, you better get the GOP Senate leadership on the horn, pronto! Someone has to tell them what you’ve figured out before it’s too late!

    Identical behavior between two groups

    There’s your problem right there.

    You argue that

    At the risk of seeming contrarian, let me suggest that I’m not arguing anything. I doubt the good folks reading us here are all that into arguments at all.

    Do you have any evidence that Donald Trump would attempt to expand the legal definition of treason (18 U.S. Code § 2381) to include criticizing the President?

    A wise lady that comes on the radio sometimes signs off her program with the admonition to “Go easy, and if you can’t go easy, go as easy as you can.”

    Remember that business about the simplest explanation being the most likely? Bearing that in mind, do you suppose I meant a) that dissent and opposition would be called treason and rancor, or b) that I was foretelling a dystopian future Hell world in which substantial changes were made to that title and section of relevant and applicable federal law? Take your time before you answer. Hint, if you wanted to redefine treason, how would you best browbeat the opposition to doing so?

    Some of us from across the yawning chasm of time remember a thing called the PATRIOT Act. How old were you then?