You’re reading too much into it. Murkowski is a liar and her vote had nothing to do with Roberts. She’s using Roberts as an excuse to shield herself from blame for abdicating her duty. Whether Roberts is “on the team” will be shown in how he rules in the Mazars cases.
The Murkowski vote is largely, I think, about maintaining the myth of Roberts' neutrality. Him casting a deciding vote would have been an optics disaster, and they want to keep him clean so he can continue to deliver for them.
-
-
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Imagine thinking the Supreme Court is neutral in 2020.
-
He could rule on any issue in that so-called “trial“ and still remain independent. That’s what he purports to do every day in the Supreme Court when it is presented with polarizing issues.
- Još 2 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Murkowski announced her decision at a senate lunch and her GOP colleagues cheered wildly liked crazed fans at a football game. There is nothing impressive or decent about letting people off the hook. You’ve done a terrible, terrible thing to our country, Senator.
@lisamurkowski - Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
-
-
He wouldn’t have done it, probably, but they didn’t want to risk it. And she threw in the faux outrage about Warren’s question (as she did earlier re Schiff’s “on a pike” reference) to take the high civility ground.
-
It’s not civil to let democracy die when you can do something about it.
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
Chris...what about Senators doing their duty to uphold their oath to the Constitution and Impartiality. I don't care about the CJ Optics. I expect Senators to do their duty.
-
Unfortunately, I think those days are over. Their loyalty is to trump now.
- Još 1 odgovor
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.