Before HW bush as VP (hello iran-contra), the VP did almost nothing. During HW's time as president, the VP did nothing. During clinton's time as president, the vp did nothing. During W's times as president, the VP was involved with torture and instigating the iraq war. During obama's time as president, the vp did nothing. During trump's time as president, the vp did nothing. During biden's time as president, the vp has done almost nothing.
The VP not being heavily involved is a good thing. The only times we've seen a VP be heavily involved in the presidency, they've broken laws that have gotten people killed and/or committed war crimes.
Not completely true, but that SHOULD be the case.
A lot of harris' non-senate role has basically been PR or fairly inept. That's not a bad thing. The VP shouldn't be heavily involved in the presidency, just kept abreast of current affairs, do PR, and show the flag events (like her time in poland).
- - - Updated - - -
This is PR. This isn't substantive, and is exactly what should be happening. They're not the president. They shouldn't be partially fulfilling the role of the president.
I'm sure in deluded right wing circles who believe every crumb published about Biden's mental state while ignoring all the evidence to the contrary...
Meanwhile they'll also clamor for Trump's return to office while ignoring all of his mental issues.
Political hacks gonna political hack.
If we didn't remove Trump from office we sure aren't removing Biden, so keep holding that binky tight to make you sleep better.
Understating that she also met the Macron and other heads state misses another key point...
Biden is comfortable sharing the spotlight and delegating. Populists and other assorted dumdums dont realize, you want this in an executive authority.
Then there's the much thornier topic, Dems in general are better at sharing power... with others.
Jokes about the VP doing nothing have been around for literally the entire existence of the office. John Adams told his wife, "My country has in its wisdom contrived for me the most insignificant office that ever the invention of man contrived or his imagination conceived." FDR's first VP said the office "isn't worth a pitcher of warm piss," and his last VP (Harry Truman) called it "useful as a cow's fifth teat." When the Whigs asked Daniel Webster to run as Zachary Taylor's VP, he replied, "I do not propose to be buried until I am really dead and in my coffin."
The job expanded somewhat after FDR to make sure that the VP was at least kept in the loop so as to be ready in the event they had to assume the presidency, and Dick Cheney acted far beyond what VP's typically do, but broadly speaking the VP's role, unless specifically tasked with something by the president, is to essentially be an advisor.
Shit, now I'm trying to remember which VP it was they legit had to find somewhere in the woods because the president had died and they needed to swear in the next in line. Like, they legit had no clue where he was because the vice presidency at this point was sorta like being in the batter's box rather than playing a role in the game.
https://apnews.com/article/capitol-s...10edcad1ed18e8
Man, I'm pretty over Garland so far. He would have made a fine Justice, but I'm not remotely impressed with him as AG - even if the DoJ has had some solid non-political-related wins.
Dump him and don't even bother with the whole charade of getting a replacement through the Senate. The precedent has already been set, just have an "acting" AG, it doesn't matter, and if Republicans bitch and moan remind them that most of Trump's cabinet were "acting" officials and they seemed remarkably fine with that.
If you're hesitant to press criminal charges because you're worried about political fallout, that's corruption.
If you're unwilling to target political figures for investigation/prosecution because of how it might politically appear, that's corruption.
If you avoid targeting the wealthy because their lawyers will make the case difficult to prosecute by throwing everything they can at you, that's corruption.
I really couldn't care less if you want to try and create a distinction between a system being corrupt, or an individual. Systems become corrupt because of individuals. And once corrupted, systems remain corrupt until an individual works to reform it. If you're not actively combating and eliminating that corruption, you're part of the corruption.
This goes way deeper than the current AG, obviously.
Typical Democrat incompetence. Garland by standard was a conservative even when Obama was nominating him for SCOTUS. I will give the benefit of the doubt he has some standard of protecting the political class. By no means this is a great thing. Letting at least the two major political parties get passes, especially when one tried a coup is not what is best for the U.S.
I guess we can talk about the fine line of a President hiring a crony who hunts political opponents (cough Trump). Yet there are lines and amazing how on the Dems side they think both are now equal that if they go after these insurrectionists and yes corrupt that it will come back to them.
Is this just on the AG, who in theory should act independently of the President? Independent or not this may be looked back on as the time when we could have held people who tried a coup, had massive corruption and failed to act. Comes back to bite us on our ass.
"Buh dah DEMS"
It's not Democrat incompetence, it's not even bipartisan incompetence; this corruption's so deeply-rooted in the USA you'd probably find most Americans take issue with me calling it "corruption", having been sold a packet of lies about how this particular corruption is "good, actually".
It's not just on the AG in determining who's to blame for the status quo; that blame is applied to everyone not actively fighting that status quo, both now and in the past.Is this just on the AG, who in theory should act independently of the President? Independent or not this may be looked back on as the time when we could have held people who tried a coup, had massive corruption and failed to act. Comes back to bite us on our ass.
It is just on the AG for continuing to not fight that corruption. He can absolutely be condemned in his individual person for following along. Sure, he might get fired for bucking his masters, but if you're unwilling to take that risk to do what's right, that's what being corrupt means.
You're putting the cart before the horse. The Jan 6th committee has yet to send a criminal referral for perusal by the AG's office. He's got jack shit to do before then, and the committee cannot do anything in terms of a criminal investigation. The leaks from the committee and various reps making statements don't change things.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
The Jan 6th committee has been signaling they have the goods. They're the ones with all the honored subpoenas disclosing texts and call logs. Maybe Garland isn't a dummy and doesn't have a chargeable crime to pursue in an investigation. He has the Meadows referral on his desk right now, and Bannon's trial is in July.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."
I doubt the thread mainstream that it's only Garland's cowardice that is stopping it. I wager he's waiting for the Jan 6th's conclusion and referral, so it doesn't end up like the Manhattan DA's case on Trump fraud. But feel free to continue believing as you will; I'm not some crusader to make everybody into skeptics like me.
"I wish it need not have happened in my time." "So do all who live to see such times. But that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us."