Meta answer regarding migrating broad reference requests (e.g. looking for relevant text books or papers with a scope that's too broad for main) to meta. Please vote to indicate whether you agree or not. :)
Many questions about the Iranian Nuclear threat against Israel and the poor performance of the Biden administration have been closed as off-topic. (Israel itself is also to blame for not taking the Iranian nuclear threat seriously).
The Biden government's diplomacy is also foggy and has no clear ...
The House Jan-6 investigation committee consists of 9 house representatives, 7 are Democrats, only two are Republicans. Note that the original plan called for 10 members with half from Democrats and half from the Republicans, somehow, it changed to 13 with 8 from Democratic Party and 5 from Repub...
This question seems to be looking for reasons to justify claiming Democrats are doing something wrong with the January 6th commision. Whenever it gets brought up that Republicans refused multiple offers to run it jointly and equally they just point out what it looks like now.
Also ignoring the threats of punishment for any Republican that joined it
Yea, there are two ways to deal with that. Either close it as a push question or reject the premise in an answer. Discussing it in comments probably isn't helpful, that will just spiral into an endless back and forth where nobody ends up agreeing.
Yea there's not much we can do about that. If you really think specific parts should be taken out against the OP's wishes then you could start a meta discussion. But it's not something that can be done easily without the OP's consent (while leaving the question open I mean).
