The Covid vaccine thing is particularly rich coming from the democrats who were openly hostile to it when trump was in office. Pretty funny.Gary is a city. My point being it's incredibly stupid to not blame both political parties for contributing to crime and violence.
I understand what you’re getting at. I’m in such a profession. I just don’t agree that the topic is relevant here. I see the coi. But it’s a general coi that applies to politicians and public servants profiting off of said service and the potential that buyers might earn favor. Eg, a Chinese bank buys 7 figures of Bernie books.I don’t care if politicians want to tell their life stories and potentially profit from that. That’s capitalism and the American way.
My point about Barrett’s objectivity is that she has now tied a financial interest to one of her beliefs, in the form of future book sales. If another abortion case were to come before the court, she would be in a bind because any vote she cast or opinion she gave that isn’t consistent with her views expressed in the book could undermine her credibility and hurt future book sales.
It doesn’t matter that Barrett still holds the same beliefs, this book deal creates the APPEARANCE of a conflict of interests and we won’t know whether Barrett made her decision based on the facts and merit of the case or if she simply wanted to protect her financial interest.
I know this is a fairly nuanced topic for many, but those of us in professions involving the “public trust” will understand what I’m getting at; it’s an issue that we frequently encounter.
Last edited: