June 05, 2024

Puta Rubin's Vile Attack on Alito

Timothy Birdnow

This is disgraceful. Jennifer Rubin USED to be considered a Conservative too.

She is fit to be tied that Justice Sam Alito won't recuse himself from hearing the Trump immunity case because, drumroll please, he had a couple of unnamed flags flying at his home. The media has been very careful to not tell us what flags constitute "flaggate" because our tender sensibilities would be horrified, but they assure us they are the banners of MAGA Republicans and J6 insurrectionists. I suspect they include the American flag and the Gadsden "don't tread on me" flag.

The Horror!

Rubin gives us such dandies as these:

"Nevertheless, Alito’s response — in a letter to Durbin and Whitehouse, and in a Fox News interview — laying out his improbable version of events and asserting the constitutional right of his wife, Martha-Ann, to make her own flag-flying decisions, showed such unbridled arrogance as to suggest, as New York University law professor Melissa Murray put it, that he was "trolling” America."

[...]

"The implausibility of Alito’s account regarding the flag-flying (which contradicts the timeline reported in the New York Times) underscores the perils of unchecked judicial authority, not constrained by term limits or adequate ethical rules. (Meanwhile, Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. flatly refused the two senators’ meeting request.) Congress, the executive branch and American voters have five non-mutually exclusive options for dealing with this matter."

(Since when do liberals worry about "unchecked judicial authority" and "adequate ethical rules"? Only when they don't get their way.)

She goes on to quote Impeachment manager Jamie Raskin, a frothing at the mouth partisan, as though he were a credible source.

Here's more:

"Raskin based his argument on both the due process clause of the 14th Amendment and 28 U.S.C. Section 455, the statutory mandate that a judge "shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Presumably — but who knows?! — the two compromised justices would not consider the matter, leaving the other seven justices to rule on such a motion."

How is Alito or Thomas in any way biased here? You can't fly flags on your private property now?

"Although such an approach is important for educating the public about the manifest intellectual corruption of the court, it has two obvious flaws. To be blunt, fat chance getting Attorney General Merrick Garland to do it. This Justice Department is not known for its boldness, risk-taking or leadership."

??? She doesn't think raiding a former President's home with shoot to kill orders is bold? This woman is delusional.

"Still, it is worth pursuing (including the demand for Garland to do something), if for no other reason than to call attention to the two justices’ malfeasance and to Roberts’s singular lack of spine."

Malfeasance? Prosecuting Trump on these Trumped up charges is malfeasance you silly fool! Alito and Thomas are the polar opposite of malfeasance; they are a breath of sanity in a world gone mad.

She calls for Senate Judiciary Committee hearings, and for new ethics laws passed by Congress over the Supreme Court.

Now, I believe Rubin has a law degree, but even if she doesn't she must surely have taken a course in civics in school. The Supreme Court is a coequal branch of government and it sets it's own ethics rules. Congress has no authority over the internal workings of SCOTUS. None. They cannot do this. If they try the Court can tell them to go coitus themselves and make it stick. They can call one of the Justices before them and the Justice can choose to go or not; they have the same privilege as does the President in that regard. Congress cannot compel the President himself to appear before them either.

She shows her stupidity here:

'Third, as Whitehouse urged, the Senate should put on the floor his Supreme Court Ethics, Recusal and Transparency Act of 2023. It already passed through the Judiciary Committee. (Where is Majority Leader Sen. Charles E. Schumer?) This bill would "require Supreme Court Justices to adopt a code of conduct; create a mechanism to investigate alleged violations of the code of conduct and other laws; improve disclosure and transparency when a Justice has a connection to a party or amicus before the Court; and require Justices to explain their recusal decisions to the public.”'

And when this law is challenged, who does she think will hear it? Duh.

Here is the kicker:

"Fourth, if the two conflicted justices hear Trump’s immunity case, and if they concoct a mechanism that either extends absolute immunity to Trump or sets up a lower-court process making impossible a trial before the November election, Americans can and should engage in massive, peaceful demonstrations in defense of the rule of law. A president, let alone an ex-president, is not a king; partisan hacks in robes are still partisan hacks."

You heard it folks; she's calling for insurrection! What this Puta just said was almost identical to what Trump said on January six. It was insurrection then. Why isn't the FBI calling on Rubin and maybe charging her with attempting to overthrow the U.S. government by force?

Her hatred of Trump has driven her mad.

She is openly calling for Alito's impeachment at this point. For what? Not treating Chuck You Schumer with the proper deference? I didn't know that was a requisite for sitting on the Court. For refusing to quit when the Left shrieks?

And who will hear the impeachment trial? Come on Jenny; you know better than that.

She concludes:

"Alito and Thomas, coupled with Roberts’s clueless passivity and inability to exert ethical leadership, have plunged the Supreme Court into a crisis. But they have thereby opened the door to much-needed reforms that could restore the court’s luster. Defenders of the rule of law should grasp this historic opportunity to rehabilitate a faltering, increasingly disreputable institution."

No, it is the assaults on the rule of law by Democrats that have led to this, and it is the efforts of the Conservatives on the Court to restore the rule of law that so enrages these people. She knows it too. Vile, dishonest woman!

P.S. It turns out Alito flew an upside down U.S. flag after Trump's conviction and an "appeal to Heaven" flag over his beachhouse. The horror!

Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at 11:31 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1060 words, total size 7 kb.




What colour is a green orange?




25kb generated in CPU 0.0273, elapsed 0.207 seconds.
35 queries taking 0.1883 seconds, 160 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
Always on Watch
The American Thinker
Bird`s Articles
Old Birdblog
Birdblog`s Literary Corner
Behind the Black Borngino Report
Canada Free Press
Common Sense and Wonder < br/ > Christian Daily Reporter
Citizens Free Press
Climatescepticsparty,,a>
_+
Daren Jonescu
Dana and Martha Music On my Mind Conservative Victory
Eco-Imperialism
Gelbspan Files Infidel Bloggers Alliance
Let the Truth be Told
Newsmax
>Numbers Watch
OANN
Real Climate Science
The Reform Club
Revolver
FTP Student Action
Veritas PAC
FunMurphys
The Galileo Movement
Intellectual Conservative
br /> Liberty Unboound
One Jerusalem
Powerline
Publius Forum
Ready Rants
The Gateway Pundit
The Jeffersonian Ideal
Thinking Democrat
Ultima Thule
Young Craig Music
Contact Tim at bgocciaatoutlook.com

Monthly Traffic

  • Pages: 60417
  • Files: 8399
  • Bytes: 2.7G
  • CPU Time: 80:20
  • Queries: 2171455

Content

  • Posts: 28934
  • Comments: 129122

Feeds


RSS 2.0 Atom 1.0