You mean like you did yesterday in the mens basketball thread? I think you should spend a bit of time on the 'equal protection' portions if you ask me.
You are ok with the millions of dollars in benefits that those public servants have received from private citizens, who then gained billions due to favorable SC decisions favoring their causes?
In the 234 years how many shits like Thomas have so seriously gamed the system? Millions in benefits followed by favorable decisions to those providing said benefits. Those assholes don’t even bother to hide it these days. They are blatantly gaming the citizens.
No, I am against actual corruption. As in the Biden Crime Syndicate benefiting from an infusion of money from China and Ukraine over the last decade. Then the head of the snake pardoning his son for that entire period so as to immunize him from due prosecution. THAT I am against. The facts seem very clear to me.
Extreme? Almost 20 years ago we heard a Supreme Court Justice argue that appearance of money doesn’t imply corruption. This was an argument in favor of citizens United, which allowed dark money to to be completely legal in our system.
Such a clown show. Drump steals in broad daylight, yet you chase some bullshit with no legs.
Better than being a flat out racist IMO.
Stoop talk. Deflection from your BS regarding Thomas and Alito. Take it home, troll.
I'm happy to debate almost anything.
Is it the Biden Crime Syndicate? The Clinton Crime syndicate? Or just the Democratic crime syndicate? I can’t tell with y’all.
To be fair I expected this sort of dodge. It’s his only move.
The textualism/originalism gambit is a brilliantly disingenuous move by the Fed Soc types. It does nothing to constrain the exercise of judicial power, but people buy into it because it can fit on a bumper sticker. See Heller and Bostock as examples of how indeterminate the products of those "methodologies" truly are.
The textualism/originalism gambit is a brilliantly disingenuous move by the Fed Soc types. It does nothing to constrain the exercise of judicial power, but people buy into it because it can fit on a bumper sticker. See Heller and Bostock as examples of how indeterminate the products of those "methodologies" truly are.
As a member of the SCOTUS bar, I am truly disappointed in Justice Alito's behavior over the past few years, and I think he is nearing impeachable territory. To say nothing of the fact that his jurisprudential philosophy is so obviously malleable to the outcome he prefers. Textualism and originalism unless they favor my undesired outcome, then we should worry about context, purpose, results, and legislative history. To say nothing of his ethical missteps or his pathetic defenses thereof. Federal judges have been impeached and removed for far less in our history. And he has the nerve to condemn the bar for not coming to his defense after getting called out on his nonsense.
Alito says he has 'a pretty good idea' who leaked Dobbs, complains that organized bar isn't defending justices
Justice Samuel Alito says he personally has “a pretty good idea who is responsible” for the May 2, 2022, leak of the U.S. Supreme Court’s abortion decision, “but that’s different from the level of proof that is needed to name somebody.”www.abajournal.com
K then. A party should not have ex parte communication with a judge in a pending case.
Nobody says they're innocent but things are so beyond wacked with the Republican Party I have always known that the two sides aren't comparable. The Democrats aren't a whole lot different than they were 30 years ago. The Republicans have gone batshit.
These guys aren't capable of using logic. I am convinced of that.
Right. Like we're supposed to believe that.
They disclosed the call or no one would ever know about it. Believe what you want. Like Fanni Willis is a genius legal mind especially in prosecuting RICO cases and didnt collide with Trumps political opponent in a clear case of election interference. Believe that. Or that New York hasn't attempted.to disenfranchise the rest of the country in choosing a president. Believe that.
If that’s the case maybe some better optics if the call was next week?
This call could have happened at any point…it just HAPPENED to happen just before the SC hears a case involving Trump.
I’m talking in terms of monetary gain.
Both are true.
Kangaroo Court. Bonespurs likes to talk about fixed judges in his felont financial case, and yet here he is calling Supreme Court Justices trying to fix his appeal. Just follows his old strategy, always blame the other side for what you're doing. He's a POS. America has to be ashamed.
We don't know what they did or didn't discuss, but either way, this is one of those 'appearance of impropriety' situations where you just don't have a call unless there's a very specific non-sinister reason for doing so.
The corruptor in chief, or maybe it's the felon in chief, is in charge starting in a few days.. So yes expect that.
Particularly given each’s history.
