When you cheered for The Ukraine clown and swore off all Russian people but have to cease it all and talk about January 6th again because both Ukraine and your president are losing.
When you cheered for The Ukraine clown and swore off all Russian people but have to cease it all and talk about January...
Angel Cook
Parker Howard
But...Ukraine isn't losing. If Russia continues its current rate of advance then it's gonna take them 10 years to actually seize the entire Donbas region.
>raine clown and swore off all Russian people but have to cease it all and talk about January 6th again
We never stopped talking about January 6th. A president trying ineptly to stage an autocoup is kind of a big deal. The only people who stopped talking about 1/6 are Fox News as they try to convince America that sedition and insurrection aren't a big deal.
Jason Harris
>But...Ukraine isn't losing. If Russia continues its current rate of advance then it's gonna take them 10 years to actually seize the entire Donbas region.
So they are losing?
Isaiah Murphy
losing too slowly while forcing the enemy through imaginary goalposts in your mind = winning
Carson Barnes
he's part of the club, he does what he's told or he gets fed to the pigs on Skippy's farm
Justin Parker
Daily reminder that this guy is IRISH.
It's Colbert. Not Colbé~
Hudson Collins
Ryder Foster
Cringe bro. Don't you tire of being wrong about everything?
Nicholas Roberts
Do you really think Russia can sustain a war like this for 10 years?
Keep in mind it isn't even a steady advance. Earlier this week Russia had seized all of Severodonetsk (and this was Ukraine that reported this), but as of right now Ukraine is attempting to claw it back and has troops in the city.
The best possible outcome for Russia at the moment, barring a miracle, is gaining control of the Donbas region - a region they already basically de facto controlled before the war began. And even that isn't certain. They certainly aren't going to be able to force any kind of regime change in Kyiv, and more likely than not Ukraine will be joining NATO after this war concludes as long as it retains any kind of independence.
In addition to that, Sweden and Finland are joining NATO and Europe is diversifying its energy imports, which is a pretty big deal given that Europe was by a wide margin the main buyer of Russian oil (I think it was something like 60%).
Russia has pretty much completely ruined itself in the long-term diplomatically and economically, all so that they can seize control of a region they already basically controlled.
If that's Russia "winning", I shudder to think of what Russia losing would look like.
Zachary Harris
>Do you really think Russia can sustain a war like this for 10 years?
I think a long drawn out war would suit them better than Ukraine.
Im not sure if the UK economy would survive a 10 year Ukraine war. The current sanctions Russia has put on us are devastating our economy. 40% of our diesel is refined in Russia because of the greenies. How is that sustainable?
We would at least have to start mining coal again which I think is a good thing. Maybe go back to steam technology.
Parker Hughes
only american puppets are against russia
Kayden Clark
TRUMP WANTED NATIONAL GUARD IN A MEMO FROM JAN 2ND. THEY DENIED IT ON PURPOSE SINCE JAN 6TH WAS A FED-OPERAION
Hunter Edwards
You’re a fucking fag, dude
Jason Walker
Here's a fun fact for you to consider: the 1/6 insurrection attempt wouldn't have even legally worked anyway.
The basic premise was that if the counting is disrupted, then due to the wording of the Constitution on the matter, the counting is forced to stop entirely, and ergo Biden can't be appointed President, and ergo Trump gets to stay President.
But that's not, Constitutionally, how Presidential succession works.
On the 20th of January at noon, whoever is currently President stops being President. That happens no matter what the electoral college says. However, simultaneously whoever was appointed by the counting of the electoral votes on 1/6 becomes President. This is why it doesn't matter that Biden was technically sworn in "too early" at 11:50 on 1/20, the swearing in and everything is just ceremony that we do because ceremonies are fun. Biden actually became President at noon.
But anyway, in the case of a President who wins a second term, he stops being President on 1/20 but simultaneously begins his second term. If Trump had won the electoral college, that's what would have happened. His term doesn't "continue", he has two distinct terms, the first of which ends simultaneously with the second beginning.
But if votes hadn't been counted on 1/6, and the argument had been successfully made that since 1/6 had passed they now CAN'T be counted, what would have happened is Trump still would have stopped being President on 1/20 at noon. But with no votes having been counted and certified on 1/6, there would be no one to begin a new Presidential term.
Ditto all of the above for Vice President. But notably, not for anyone else in the government.
Cont'd...
Mason Powell
take a look of this expert xDDD kys
Mason Barnes
cont'd...
So what would have happened, Constitutionally, is this:
1. The Constitution tries to make whoever was appointed on 1/6 President.
2. Finding that position vacant, it would try and make whoever was appointed Vice President on 1/6 Acting President. But that spot, too, would be vacant.
3. The Constitution would then go to the third in line to make them Acting President: the Speaker of the House. And the Speaker's appointment has NOTHING TO DO with the electoral count on 1/6. It wasn't disrupted and there would have been a Speaker on 1/20...Nancy Pelosi.
The big insurrection attempt? Trump's auto-coup effort? The grand culmination of it would have been to make NANCY PELOSI the Acting President of the United States.
Now I suppose the good news for retards is that Pelosi, in order to take the position, would have had to resign as a Representative: you can't be in two branches of government simultaneously. Presumably what Pelosi would have done would be to nominate Biden as her acting VP, then resign, making Biden the Acting President, and then Biden would have appointed Harris as his acting VP.
Oh, it's important to note that, yes, in all these situations they would be "acting" President/Vice President. Technically not the real President, but legally and Constitutionally there wouldn't BE a real President. Certainly not Trump.
So.
Y'all are retarded for trying to pull off the 1/6 coup, is what I'm getting at. It wouldn't have turned out the way you wanted it to.
Joshua Lee
I'm a bit lost. Are we back to Jan. 6th? I thought we were on to the Monkeypox?
Daniel Ortiz
>Y'all
Connor Harris
Imagine simping for this colossal fuckup of a government and thinking you're on the "right side of history".
Mason Morales
It's not ideal. But it is preferable to the alternative, which is a man who refuses to give up power when the time comes.
Xavier Diaz
A scathing rebuttal, sir.
Xavier Martinez
Cool gif. Very spoopy.