Will Democrats call this an illegal action?

[ScratchCat]

And demand removal and prosecution of all involved? Folks, this isn't remotely close to legitimate and the UN is probably going to condem it and demand the release of their leadership. Democrats need to stand together right now, label this illegal and the distraction we know it is and make this the red line.

[SocialDemocrat61]

1. Will republicans?

[Scrivener7]

2. Will Democrats?

[SocialDemocrat61]

3. So blame democrats

who don’t control any branch of government and let republicans, who control every branch, off the hook?

[Bettie]

5. I would hope that

Elected Democrats will speak out against this.

[SocialDemocrat61]

6. Little else they can do

when republicans control every branch of government. Maybe we should start blaming them instead of attacking democrats.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

7. How is expecting my leaders to speak and act for me in a way I support -- which is why they get my vote -- an attack?

[SocialDemocrat61]

9. Because they have no power despite your vote

Republicans control all of government. This is their responsibility and we should be attacking them and not creating a new purity test for democrats.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

11. You have a very narrow idea of what power is, I guess.

[QueerDuck]

19. Their "power" (words) will be ridiculed as "fist-shaking" and "sternly written letters"...

that have no legal force and are "not worth the paper they are written on"... just wait and see. Whatever the Democrats do... it's "never enough" for those who take great delight in attacking the party and leadership rather than placing the blame where it belongs.

Sigh. Heaven help us.

[mcar]

120. Exactly

[MorbidButterflyTat]

123. Every time! Must be tradition by now.

And that "sternly worded letter" criticism is so lame. It's over. And stupid to begin with.

[QueerDuck]

184. Tradition... habit... compulsion... obsession... fixation... monomania. (Pick one.)

Ugh. 🤮

[SocialDemocrat61]

23. Yes, it's defined as controlling a branch of government

Please define the constitutional powers held by the party in the minority?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

29. That is *one* definition of *one kind* of power, sure. I'll leave you to it.

[SocialDemocrat61]

38. Yes it's called legal power

Which is the only power that matters in government.

[W_HAMILTON]

122. Or some have no idea what power is.

Spoiler alert: shit-posting on social media or holding a post-election rally in a blue dot of a red state is not power.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

135. don't I fuckin know it

[CrispyQ]

71. No power doesn't mean no voice.

The collective voice of the Party has been beyond disappointing this past year, considering the unprecedented events taking place. We have a dozen, maybe two dozen voices speaking out, but we lack a cohesive message of outrage against this regime. Ken Martin might be the most unmemorable & ineffective DNC chair ever, known mostly for his pleas for money rather than any battle cry for social justice. I don't think the dems have ever valued marketing & I just don't get it.

[SocialDemocrat61]

73. So instead of holding republicans accountable

when they control every branch of government, it’s better to attack democrats?

[CrispyQ]

77. Apparently your definition of attack includes voicing disagreement with dem leadership. Mine doesn't.

We don't march lockstep. If the voters think congressional dems need to up their game against this authoritarian takeover, then we have every right, actually, we have a duty to tell them.

[SocialDemocrat61]

88. Yes it does

when it is unfair and avoids holding republicans accountable when they control every branch of government.

[Cirsium]

156. Huh

Yet here you are attacking Democrats with whom you disagree.

[SocialDemocrat61]

157. I'm calling for republicans

to be held accountable since they control every branch of government? Why is that objectionable?

[Cirsium]

160. It isn't

And it is disingenuous to claim that anyone does.

I don't believe you are "calling for Republicans to be held accountable." Republicans are being blamed, all over DU. Democrats are not being "attacked." But any Democrat who fails to condemn these illegal actions by the Trump regime will get criticism from me. Why would that be objectionable?

[SocialDemocrat61]

161. Yes I am calling for republicans to be held accountable

But you are free to believe what you want if it gives you comfort.

[Cirsium]

163. OK

Yet you are here, attacking Democrats, not Republicans. Odd way to be "calling for republicans to be held accountable."

[SocialDemocrat61]

164. What democrats have I attacked?

Chuck Schumer? Hakeem Jeffries? Biden? Harris? Please point out what democrats I attacked?

[Cirsium]

168. Democrats right here

Or do only those in power count as Democrats for you?

Is it OK with you if I disagree with an elected Democrat who says this?

"¡Libertad! Today I celebrate with the people of Venezuela in Colorado and elsewhere. The tyrant has fallen!"

Or would that be "attacking Democrats?"

What if Marco Rubio said that?

[SocialDemocrat61]

170. What democrats right here?

I have no idea if anyone here is a democrat or not. And neither do you. Nor have I personally attacked anyone. I have had a difference of opinion. That is not a personal attack.

[Cirsium]

174. I guess you win

[SocialDemocrat61]

175. It's not about winning

Unless you’re talking about the midterms.

[BannonsLiver]

177. I think the politics on this are pretty simple for Democrats

1. Praise the military on the execution of the mission. The full picture is not clear quite yet but based on what we know now the objectives were met. This one is a layup politically for Dems.

2. Something in this neighborhood : “Time will tell if Trump’s actions will make life better for Venezuelans, or become one more of the many failures of an unpopular, erratic and disturbed president.”

There’s no point into getting into any more nuance than that. And No.2 guards against getting boxed in like Kerry did in 2004 with the “I was for it before I was against it” pivot.

This is a play the long game moment. It won’t be as bad as Iraq, but there’s 0.0 chance this bunch could run an occupation or extended operation without a helluva lot of fuckups.

[yellow dahlia]

180. I agree.

We need to hold our leaders accountable. They work for us. They represent us. Represent us!

We can criticize the Repugs and point out how they are betraying this country....all day long.

But the reps we have in DC need to do their job also. Myself and many friends are out on the streets weekly and more - we are doing what we can. We are representing WE THE PEOPLE. I don't think we are out of line to ask our reps to do their job also.

[mcar]

137. Trump and his fascists have waged illegal war against a sovereign nation

so let's talk about how Democrats suck, right?

[yellow dahlia]

179. I don't understand why Ken Martin beat Martin O'Malley

for the DNC Chair.

[choie]

79. That doesn't mean that we shouldn't

expect Dems to call it what it is.

[SocialDemocrat61]

84. So we shouldn't hold republicans accountable?

It's all on the democrats?

[choie]

85. Oh for CHRISSAKES!

You know that’s not what anyone here means. Stop it.

[SocialDemocrat61]

89. Yet some have spent a lot of time

attacking democrats without a word of criticism for republicans. Interesting.

[Joinfortmill]

101. Thank you.

[mcar]

138. No we don't know that

If one's first reaction to this is to attack Democrats, we can come to certain conclusions.

[PufPuf23]

124. The Democratic leadership should hold the GOP accountable.

Democratic leadership not holding the GOP accountable is how the USA got in the present mess.

That has been a fact of life during my entire voting life of over 50 years.

When we get the edge, we compromise away the advantage and stay in thrall to the corporate beast over the people.

[SocialDemocrat61]

126. Exactly what should they be doing?

That is legal according to the constitution? Please be specific

[walkingman]

133. The really sad thing for me is ......

is that we as a Party have not been able to defeat someone that has such low character, low morals, and no ethics. Not sure if it is a reflection of our country or our party - but it is sad.

[mcar]

139. And how should they be doing that?

Be specific, please.

[JBTaurus83]

129. I completely disagree

The Democrats have the power of public opinion right now and should use it to call this what it is.

[SocialDemocrat61]

148. Do they?

I didn’t realize that democrats control the media. Maybe Bari Weiss will give them time on CBS to air the objections.

[JBTaurus83]

178. I do understand your point

I do think savvy Dems could be going on social media and other formats more. Teenagers figure it out . the “Peace Monks” figured it out. A party that has been around so long with hundreds of millions in donations should be able to as well.

[SocialDemocrat61]

182. Many have already

Such as AOC

It’s not about drugs. If it was, Trump wouldn’t have pardoned one of the largest narco traffickers in the world last month.

It’s about oil and regime change.

And they need a trial now to pretend that it isn’t. Especially to distract from his sinking under Epstein and skyrocketing healthcare costs.

— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@aoc.bsky.social) 2026-01-03T15:34:43.013Z

[WhiskeyGrinder]

10. Both of my Democratic senators voted to confirm Rubio. How would you suggest giving feedback about that?

[SocialDemocrat61]

14. So blame a whole party

for the actions of 2?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

17. no no I was just asking about my two senators

[SocialDemocrat61]

20. I don't know who your senators are

[WhiskeyGrinder]

21. Klobuchar and Smith. Two Democrats who voted to confirm the nomination of Marco Rubio.

[SocialDemocrat61]

24. And how does that make them responsible

for the attack on Venezuela?

[WhiskeyGrinder]

25. lmaoooooo you're right Democrats are helpless babies who should not be held accountable for anything

[SocialDemocrat61]

39. Why are you against holding republicans accountable

since they control every branch of government.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

50. How can I hold republicans accountable if I have no power over them?

[SocialDemocrat61]

57. So you don't believe in

holding republicans accountable.

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

[WhiskeyGrinder]

61. No, I asked a different question that you're not answering.

[SocialDemocrat61]

62. I'm not required to answer anyone's question

I’m just saying we should be holding republicans accountable instead of looking for ways to blame democrats.

[WhiskeyGrinder]

63. lol having come full circle, I'll disembark here

[SocialDemocrat61]

66. Well then

Have a nice day.

[WDLAL]

109. Will Republicans call this action illegal?

Possibly one or two will. They all should. We should demand that they all do so.

Will Democrats call this an illegal action? Most will. We should demand that they all do so.

No attack on any leader; just stating an expectation from them.

[tirebiter]

147. Call them and tell them what you want. I called mine

Contact Your US Senator | Our website is here to help you ...

callyoursenate.com
https://www.callyoursenate.com
See Who's on the Ballot Before You Vote. Our Senate Election Tracker helps you see which seats are up for reelection, who's running, and what's ...Read more

[CrispyQ]

74. Do we have the same senators?

Colorado here. Bennet & Hickenlooper, for me. IIRC, Hick voted for eight of Trump's nominees, almost as many as Fetterman. He said we have to work with the repubs where we can. Holy fuck, Hick!!! Not when they're installing fascists!!!

[WhiskeyGrinder]

76. Spoiler alert: All senators voted to confirm Rubio.

[CrispyQ]

78. I was more upset that Hick voted for some of the more heinous ones & almost tied Fetterman.

WTF?

[Joinfortmill]

104. I don't think they believed he would sell his soul. He did.

[Scrivener7]

13. So asking for a united voice of condemnation is an attack, now?

That's idiotic.

Also, if you believe our elected leaders can't withstand our asking for a united voice of condemnation, you must believe they're pretty damn useless.

I don't. I believe there is plenty they can do.

[SocialDemocrat61]

16. Or maybe focus on republicans

instead of looking for reasons to attack democrats.

[Scrivener7]

22. Or maybe asking for a united voice of condemnation

has nothing to do with attacking and is a perfectly normal response to the situation.

Though I suppose there are some who continue to be enraged by the obvious fact that our leaders have a role to play. And that's whynwe elected them to be our leaders.

[SocialDemocrat61]

27. It's constructing a purity test for democrats

While letting republicans off the hook.

[Takket]

41. uh no... that's a really absurd take

Asking Democrats to speak out on illegal actions of the administration is not an "attack", it is simply them doing their jobs. They can't impeach drumpf for this without the rethugs, but they can certainly use their bully pulpit to call this what it is, and shine a light on the situation for their constituents, which is really all the OP is asking for.

[SocialDemocrat61]

51. Why not call out republicans

instead of looking for reasons to criticize democrats?

[Gore1FL]

58. The question asked was concerning the Democratic response.

You are free to make a thread concerning the GOP response. Suggesting that this is either an unworthy topic, or somehow an attack is misplaced, however. Accountability isn't just for the other side.

[SocialDemocrat61]

60. So we are not allowed to say

republicans should be held accountable when they control all branches of government?

[Gore1FL]

64. I literally suggested you make a thread on that topic. I have no say on what is allowed, but clearly, I encourage it.

Go forth and make your wish come true; you are fully empowered to do so.

[SocialDemocrat61]

68. Maybe I will

but will still respond to comments in this thread.

[Gore1FL]

69. As you should. nt

[CrispyQ]

82. Nobody is saying that except you.

You have chewed all the meat off this bone. Give it up.

[SocialDemocrat61]

92. Sorry

but I'm going to speak out and not be censured.

[CrispyQ]

132. Ditto. -nt

[Joinfortmill]

105. Well, I'm not certain 'criticism' is what is being asked.

That said, I think we can hold more than one thought/opinion in our heads at once.

[SocialDemocrat61]

107. It's creating a purity test for democrats

instead of focusing on holding republicans accountable.

[Bettie]

93. So, are you hoping that

Democrats say nothing or praise this?

I'm not sure where you are on this? Do you think it is a good thing?

[SocialDemocrat61]

94. No

I think that it is just more constructive to hold republicans accountable then looking for excuses to attack democrats.

[SocialDemocrat61]

146. I'm criticizing Republicans

since they control government. I not creating any purity tests for democrats.

[mcar]

140. This +1000!

[Bettie]

37. They can speak out against illegal actions

do you think that expecting them to do that is wrong?

It isn't an attack on Democrats to say "They should be speaking out about this!".

[Scrivener7]

45. There is a small but vocal group here that consistently insists that we not "subject"

our elected leaders to feedback because, according to this small group, our Democratic leaders have no role to play in any event. This group insists that anyone who suggests Democrats do have a role to play is "bashing" or "attacking" them. The clear implication of their position is that Democratic leaders are useless whimps who can't do anything at all.

This is very disrespectful to our Democratic leaders. I wish they would stop.

[SocialDemocrat61]

72. There is a a group who consistently let republicans off the hook

and spend all their time criticizing democrats despite democrats not controlling a single branch of government.

[Bettie]

102. I agree and

asking our leaders to stand up for Democratic principles is not an attack.

Expecting Republicans to be anything but the monsters they are is an exercise in futility. Most of us believe that Democrats are, generally speaking, better human beings. I guess that is too much for some.

Thinking I might just need to start up that ignore list again. I tend to not have anyone on there, but today? I'm in WTF mode.

[Scrivener7]

116. I think so too. I think we have some trolls here who use this position as a

method to A) stir shit and B) prevent people from voicing opposition in the only way it would be effective.

[Bettie]

142. That's where I am as well

Good to know others see the same thing

[SocialDemocrat61]

46. Why not expend energy calling out republicans

Instead of creating a purity test for democrats?

[QueerDuck]

80. I think there's a rush of adrenaline that comes from these calls for purity...

and the virtue signaling that accompanies those making the demands (and other assorted backhanded insinuations and false but passive-aggressive insults and suggestions of incompetence and negligence.) It's primarily to demonstrate the someone's superior ethical standing and personal character and as people who are independent thinkers who value "truth" over "blind loyalty".

I think it's amusing how the folks online are demanding that the Democrats take a firm stance by "saying something" are often the ones who heckle and ridicule the loudest with taunts of "sternly written letters" and "finger wagging" and "fist shaking".

It's fair to point out, however, that when Democrats do these things, it's criticized as being not enough, and it always receives that type of ridicule. But in situations like right now, when a more thoughtful approach is warranted and when a unified response is being formulated in the early hours of this crisis... the Democrats are being chided for NOT rushing to publish "sternly written letters". FFS!

[SocialDemocrat61]

90. Exactly

It's a total double standard. And those most critical of democrats say little to ever criticize republicans.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

131. Agree. Completely.

[LuvLoogie]

96. Your whole interaction on this thread is bashing DU Democrats

for asking our reps to wake up and oppose this regime by any means at their disposal.

[SocialDemocrat61]

97. No

It's saying that time and energy would be better spent holding republicans accountable. Do you object to criticism of republicans?

[Scrivener7]

119. Yes. It seems to be an attempt to silence requests for a concerted opposition to this illegal attack.

Which is ... odd.

[mcar]

144. They are and have been all day!

WTF is going on here? This OP is an excuse to slam Democrats for not doing something they are doing. Take 2 minutes and check for yourself.

This is an embarassing moment for DU, IMO.

Using this as an excuse to slam Democrats is just wrong.

[Bettie]

150. Thread started pretty early in the morning

and no one was slamming anyone.

Whatever....guess I'm going to need to start an ignore list. I'm recovering from an auto accident and am on and off at weird hours, so I don't see everything the very second it is posted.

There was no slamming, just an expression of hope that they would not stay quiet about this and, it seems that they are not, which is what we were hoping for.

[Grim Chieftain]

83. I agree

I'm reminded of the old saying, "Silence gives consent".

[CousinIT]

154. They're all over socials condemning it.

And since they are the minority, they have to beg their Trumpian colleagues to join them in that condemnation, which they surely won't.

[Bettie]

162. When I saw the news it was early in the day

thus the hope that they would speak up....it was early.

Now, I have to lie back down....still recovering and not able to be upright for long periods of time.

In any case, those of us who were hopeful are happy to see them speaking up.

[CousinIT]

166. Yikes. Hope you feel better soon!

[Bettie]

172. Auto accident on the 19th

Improving, but not fast. Was in passenger seat, direct hit by car at 55 mph.

Mostly banged up, but slow going and limited online time at this point

[CousinIT]

173. Well that sucks! Take care of yourself!

Nobody here is going anywhere, so no rushing. Health comes first.

[Scrivener7]

8. I don't see blame. I see someone asking if Democrats

will respond appropriately.

We're allowed to ask that, and it's a legitimate question.

[SocialDemocrat61]

12. Maybe we should be asking republicans

since they control every branch of government.

[Scrivener7]

15. So you don't believe we should be allowed to ask for a united voice of condemnation.

That's pretty ridiculous.

[SocialDemocrat61]

18. I believe that we should be holding republicans accountable

and not looking for reasons to bash democrats.

[Scrivener7]

26. Again, asking for a united voice of opposition from the leaders we elected to an obiously

illegal international action is not bashing.

Insisting our elected leaders can't withstand a request for a united voice of opposition is pretty disrespectful to those elected leaders. It implies they are useless whimps. You shouldn't be so disrespectful to them. You should stop implying they are useless whimps.

[SocialDemocrat61]

32. Let's hold republicans accountable

instead of letting them off the hook by creating a purity test for democrats.

[Scrivener7]

34. Again, stop implying our elected leaders are useless whimps who have no role to play. That's disrespectful.

[SocialDemocrat61]

42. Those are your words not mine.

Republicans control all branches of government. They are responsible, not democrats. Blaming democrats and letting republicans off the hook will only help republicans in November.

[Scrivener7]

49. No. They're very clearly your meaning. And again, no one blamed Democrats for anything.

The OP asked for a unified voice of opposition. That's not an attack, that's not a bash, that's a request for a unified voice of opposition to an illegal international event.

So stop disrespecting our elected Democratic leaders by insisting they are useless whimps with no role to play in any event.

[SocialDemocrat61]

53. No, it's your spin

to deflect from the fact you don’t want to hold republicans accountable?

[Scrivener7]

55. No. It's the clear meaning of all your posts in this thread. And PS: we elect our Democratic

leaders to voice our clear opposition to illegal acts. THAT's how we hold republicans accountable. That's how this works.

And you should stop disrespecting our Democratic leaders by implying that they don't hold that crucial influence.

[SocialDemocrat61]

65. No the meaning of my posts is

that republicans control every branch of our government and we should be holding them accountable rather than creating a purity test for democrats. Anything else is just dishonest spin.

[Scrivener7]

75. We elect our Democratic leaders to specifically hold republicans accountable in situations like this. That's

how we hold republicans accountable.

You, apparently, don't think that's the role of our elected representatives. So how, exactly, are you going to hold republicans accountable? I guess you could stand outside and scream, "Republicans are responsible!" at a lamppost. Good luck with that.

But I think having our elected Democratic leaders condemn the action is much more effective. And it is a crucial role of our leaders. It is disrespectful, A) to think you have a louder voice against this action than our elected Democratic leaders and B) to imply, as you have throughout this thread, that our elected Democratic leaders are whimps with no role to play.

[SocialDemocrat61]

86. So it's all on them

and the people shouldn't hold the party in power accountable. Everything is the responsibility of the minority party and they are the ones who should be held accountable. Interesting spin to avoid criticizing republicans.

[Scrivener7]

111. Again, how do you plan to make republicans hear you without going through the Democratic leaders

we have elected specifically for the purpose?

Again. Good luck yelling, "Republicans are responsible" at passing clouds.

And again, stop disrespecting Democrats by implying they are useless whimps with no role to play.

[SocialDemocrat61]

112. How about start by criticizing them

in the first place instead of looking for reasons to criticize democrats. Why are you so against criticizing republicans?

[Scrivener7]

115. That lamppost you are yelling at is not going to do anything.

[SocialDemocrat61]

117. What's wrong with

criticizing Republicans?

[Scrivener7]

121. To whom? To you? And what does that do? What is wrong with asking Democrats, whose

function is to be our concerted voice of opposition, to do just that?

And if that is not acceptable to you, if you have unilaterally decided that our age-old mechanism for effective opposition is now forbidden, to whom are you directing your criticism of republicans? Don't tell me you are directing it to republicans themselves, because you aren't. Even if you were, they don't care what you, a voiceless individual, have to say. So exactly where are you directing your individual lone-voice criticism?

Our criticism of republicans, if it is to have any effect, must come through our elected Democrats. That is how this works.

[SocialDemocrat61]

125. To everyone

Why are you so against criticizing Republicans? Plenty of ordinary people have done it.

[Scrivener7]

127. "To everyone"? Really? How are you criticizing the republicans "to everyone" for this?

How are you, today, individually criticizing this illegal international action "to everyone" without using our elected Democratic officials to do so?

And that photo of the No Kings protest: do you think that was sufficient, and today we don't need to do more in response to this new event? Because that's how you criticize republicans "to everyone?"

I was there. It's absurd for you to say I was criticizing republicans "to everyone" by being there.

[SocialDemocrat61]

128. You weren't criticizing

and protesting Republicans? Are you against criticizing Republicans? And why? What is wrong with criticizing Republicans?

[Scrivener7]

130. You have no answer but I'll ask again: How are you criticizing republicans "to everyone" individually today in response

to this event?

We're not allowed, according to you, to ask our elected leaders to fulfill that function for us, which is one of their most important roles.

So how are YOU, today, criticizing republicans "to everyone?"

[SocialDemocrat61]

145. Why are you so hostile to criticizing Republicans?

[Scrivener7]

158. Strawman-ing like that is the last refuge of those who have no actual answer. But I'll ask again:

How are you criticizing republicans "to everyone" individually today in response to this event?

We're not allowed, according to you, to ask our elected leaders to fulfill that function for us, which is one of their most important roles.

So how are YOU, today, criticizing republicans "to everyone?"

[SocialDemocrat61]

159. Why is criticizing republicans

who control all branches republicans a bad idea? Please explain.

[Scrivener7]

165. This is a straw man, as you know very well, and you keep repeating it because you have no answer.

Also, you are not criticizing republicans "to everyone." You aren't criticizing anyone except Democrats who are asking for a united Democratic opposition. And you know this too.

I see no other explanation for your actions other than that your goal is to discourage people from calling for the use of our best resource right now, namely a united Democratic expression of opposition.

I will ask the question one more time, and if you reply with the same straw man, I will know (as will everyone else) that you have no answer, and I am right.

So, one last time: How exactly are you criticizing republicans "to everyone" individually today in response to this event?

We're not allowed, according to you, to ask our elected leaders to fulfill that function for us, which is one of their most important roles.

So how are YOU, today, criticizing republicans "to everyone?"

[SocialDemocrat61]

167. So you support focusing on

criticizing republicans?

[Scrivener7]

169. Thank you for conceding that you have no answer, and that you are simply

trying to discourage the use of our most effective tool for criticizing republicans, namely a united Democratic opposition.

Your position is very clear.

But if I am mistaken and you are actually sincere, my recommendation is that you should buy a book on civics and read it.

Have a lovely day.

[SocialDemocrat61]

171. I don't concede that we should be criticizing republicans

and holding them accountable since they control all branches of government. Anything else is just spin and distraction.

[QueerDuck]

30. You are correct. These types of things are ambiguous enough to leave a plausible "just asking questions" excuse...

... but taken as a whole and as part of a larger picture and history of nitpicking and hair splitting and fault finding and Democrat blaming... it's clear what's going on here. This type of ambiguous "will Democrats do anything" is obviously implying and suggesting a preexisting belief that Democrats will not do anything, thus the question.

It's a negative assertion. It's a backhanded and passive-aggressive swipe at Democrats. I'm sick of it, too.

[SocialDemocrat61]

36. It always amazes me

that some here are are more critical of democrats than they ever are of republicans.

[QueerDuck]

40. It's a predictable pattern. I'm no longer amazed at who or when, but I'm always disappointed...

at those who continue to engage in this type of disloyalty to Democrats. In the end, it only benefits Trump and the GOP (and Russia). It defies rational explanation.

Heaven help us all.

[Maine Abu El Banat]

81. No blame

We just want to see a vocal defiance of trump illegal war. And Im sure we will.

[SocialDemocrat61]

91. What is stopping you?

You have a voice.

[Maine Abu El Banat]

113. I also have a vote

And who says I'm not speaking out.

[SocialDemocrat61]

118. Against republicans?

[azureblue]

87. Which party

is protecting pedophiles? Which party refused to remove Pedo Don from office the first time he was impeached? Which party has profited from Trump's schemes? Which party Actively covered up Trump's crimes? Which party corrupted the Supreme Court? Which party ignores the Constitution?

We're waiting for your answer...

[Scrivener7]

114. Have you gone to the halls of Congress to hang around and point at republicans and shout "I accuse you!"?

Unless you're Michael Scott-level idiotic, I'm guessing you haven't. Because no one would pay the least bit of attention to you, nor should they.

Because, instead of banging our heads against that wall, we have elected Democrats to be our voice in Congress. Democrats whose job it is to voice our opposition.

You want to hold republicans accountable, but think it's bad to ask our elected Congressional Democrats be our voices of opposition? Then how, exactly, are YOU holding republicans accountable? The only way that is done is through the Democrats we have elected to do that. So you're not holding anyone accountable.

But apparently you think each of us individually yelling "Republicans are responsible" at passing clouds is the way to go.

Really, read a civics book, for God's sake.

[Torchlight]

4. Rep Jim McGovern did.

I expect more to follow in the next 48 hours.

[Takket]

28. anyone who doesn't should be primaried at the next election.

if they can't call out something this obviously illegal, i don't know what they are doing in Washington.

and make it COMPLETELY CLEAR that we do not SUPPORT Maduro. Maduro is NOT the point. The point is there are US and international laws governing actions like this that must be obeyed and they were NOT. drumpf has overstepped his authority.

[Doodley]

67. We don't know how this will pan out. If it results in a peaceful and rapid regime change for the

better, Trump will be riding high, whether it is legal or not. This won't be an issue for Democrat lawmakers to be talking about, when bread and butter issues like healthcare and affordability are more important to voters.

[JI7]

33. Democrats should do whatever is needed to win elections

[Doodley]

35. MAGA will accuse Democrats of siding with a dictator who they will lie has killed millions of Americans.

[Takket]

44. I agree... see my post #28. Our opposition to this has to be in support of the law, not Maduro.

[Walleye]

54. The average maga guy can't tell the difference. Everything has to be personal with them

[Doodley]

70. Exactly. "Bad man gone. Trump did it! We love Trump!" That's all they need care about.

[RoseTrellis]

108. Let's not take the bait

Maduro has been condemned internationally for his actions.
The world consensus is that he stole the election.
Our leaders need to carefully agree that Venezuela is better off with him gone, but vehemently condemn unilateral military action and insist that Venezuela chooses their own leader and their own fate, and not let trump install his own dictator.

[Walleye]

52. Maga will always accuse us of stuff. Doesn't matter what we've done.

They can’t find anything they’ll go ahead and lie about it

[Doodley]

59. Do we want to win the midterms or not?

[BannonsLiver]

110. Probably so.

I’d be tempted to let him have his flowers on this, hope people forget about it and move on. The media will glaze him endlessly for such a “bold and daring” move. Making the case that it was illegal (it is) is a nuanced argument nobody will give a fuck about.

[BH liberal]

43. Let's face it...

Trump is the one who is dictating foreign policy now. Rubio, et al are just errand boys and girls.

[democrank]

47. I want to know where ALL members of Congress stand on this attack on Venezuela.

I don’t care if they are Republicans, Democrats, Independents. Asking a legitimate question is not an attack.

[malaise]

48. They had better

The regime lied to Congress

[paleotn]

56. Ummm....they already have?

[Farmer-Rick]

95. You know the war on Venezuela is nothing more

Than a political stunt because pedo Trump bombed Chavez's tomb. You don't bomb a dead man unless you are sending a message.

[SocialDemocrat61]

99. Or he's become a

flesh eating zombie.

[CrystalwolfLady]

98. ??

They claim they will, just heard Hakeem Jefferies... but he's kind of a weak speaker.
We need 25th amendment here.
And I think there is a more "sinister" issue here. He just got turned,down by scotus to deploy NG to states (he doesn't like)
So , miller said they were working on other things...
This is that.
If congress declares war, he can do another "Japanese interment"
and or deportations, by "snapping his fingers" basically.
Message your congressperson now to reject, a declaration of war & impeach or better yet & more applicable 25th Amendment. Impeach the rest of them Hegseth, ICE barbie etc...
And he trying to hide Epstein files & docs case.

[Tarc]

100. Anyone have a link or source to the official justification or hte Venezuelan action?

No "it's illegal!" one-liners, please. That's not the point. I'm interested in reading hat leaps and bounds Rubio and Hesgeth and others have laid down to justify this,

[highplainsdem]

103. It was supposedly to protect Americans serving an arrest warrant. See this:

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100220905032

[Alliepoo]

106. While there seems to be little else

The Dems can do, they need to be jumping up and down condemning this action as lawless and illegal.

[MorbidButterflyTat]

149. You first!

[betsuni]

134. As always: never give the benefit of the doubt, assume the worst, stir up cynicism, blame, anger at Democrats.

Then Democrats do the thing they're accused of not doing and it's too late or not enough or why didn't they stop it.

[SocialDemocrat61]

153. Exactly

It’s the mantra of the ‘always blame democrats’ crowd.

[mcar]

136. Yes

[BannonsLiver]

141. If you're going to draw a line in the sand there had better be some serious consequences if it's crossed.

Perhaps the OP could expound on what those consequences would look like from a practical standpoint? Beyond unified condemnation (which is unlikely to damage Trump) I’m drawing a blank.

[Scrivener7]

143. For today, a unified condemnation would be very nice.

[yaesu]

151. Should be at the very least a vote on the war powers act ASAP but don't hold your breath. nt

[RandySF]

152. Good question

Let’s take this moment to find a way to bash Democrats.

[sarisataka]

155. Nice hit and run

[RandySF]

176. I'm tired of this obsession with listening for the exact right words.

[betsuni]

181. Goldilocks waiting for just the right exact magic words purity test.

The fairy tale: Say just the right exact magic words and everyone in the land will see they are right and joyfully follow them into the progressive future, but Democrats refuse because they are corporate, corrupted by money, by campaign contributions.

Nevermind the little facts that 80% of the richest people's money goes to Republicans and there's no proof the Democratic Party has "shifted to the right" or run on progressive policies and voted with Republicans after elections because of money.

You can point out that the words health care is a human right not a privilege have been Democratic policy in the platform for decades, but it is only true when the Utopian Saviors say it and then the Democratic Establishment will stop at nothing to destroy them with rigging and evil plots.

[Scrivener7]

185. We just illegally invaded another country. Hoping to hear EVERY Democrat say, "That was wrong"

in some way or form is not an "obsession with listening for the exact right words."

[Skittles]

183. WILL ANYONE?

WHERE IS THE FUCKING MAINSTREAM PRESS ON THIS ILLEGALITY

and who the FUCK is Donald Fucking Trump to talk about election legitimacy, HE TRIED TO OVERTHROW THE FUCKING GOVERNMENT