The Ruth Bader Ginsburg flap continues
Her anti-Trump comments seem to have struck a nerve.
Ginsburg has now made an attempt at walkback:
“On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them,” the associate justice said in a statement.
She added: “Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect.”
Ouch, that slap on the wrist by the Times editorial staff must have smarted. The question is why she felt free to violate the rule for judges against commenting on candidates in the first place, one she had to have known exists. Did she feel that cocky about Hillary’s prospective victory? Does she plan to retire soon? And more importantly in the strategic sense, did she not know such remarks could backfire by pulling the mask off to show her naked partisanship? I guess when she says “more circumspect,” she means that at least until November she’ll keep her mouth shut about this.
Even some liberal commentators are noticing something, though:
On Wednesday’s edition on Bloomberg’s With All Due Respect, co-host Mark Halperin admitted what many on the left probably wouldn’t dare to. He admitted that Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s comments about Donald Trump have not been as controversial as they should be because she’s a liberal. “If a Republican justice did that to a Democratic candidate, I think, the world explode,” Halperin exclaimed to co-host John Heilemann.
Halperin’s exclamation came in response to his co-host who described Ginsburg’s comments as “unusual” and “probably inappropriate.” Halperin had plenty to say about Notorious RBG’s disparaging Trump comments. “NO! Definitely inappropriate. Repudiated by some Democrats. In this partisan period that’s extraordinary,” he said, speaking over Heilemann.
Ginsburg’s remarks are not just an example of a clear violation by Ginsburg and an indication of how partisan she is (and how bold she has become about it in her public utterances), although that’s certainly true. They highlight how biased the reporting is—so much so that a few people are defecting, at least ever-so-slightly, from the pack.
Trump slapped her harder..
and even BRAMHALL the pol cartoonist (communist/socialist/pol hack of propagandic bs), slammed her…
for an example of the hack bs
https://www.facebook.com/NYDailyNews/photos/a.307670237540.152652.268914272540/10153531592327541/?type=3
Todays cartoon with ginsberg wont be available till tomorrow unlike dilberts Scott Adams who puts them up as they are published.
on another note…
TRUMP’S SECOND-IN-COMMAND: Donald reportedly picks Indiana Gov. Mike Pence as vice presidential running mate
and on another note
black man and woman beat up a 75 year old man by attacking him from behind and beating him into unconciousness…
“Her mind is shot.” Trump hits another one out of the park, because he is not afraid to say exactly what a great number of ordinary people think.
Trump said something about Ginsburg so Ginsburg changed her behavior or apologized? Makes about as much sense as saying that Trump caused the sun to rise. The King Canute story all over again.
Perhas she meant we should wait until after the election when she’ll have more flexibilty.
Ginsburg completely undercut all the liberal moaning and rending of clothing over Trump’s criticism of Curiel’s rulings in the TU case.
Yancey: Right on! Both Curiel and Ginsburg are violating the (official) Code of Conduct for US Judges, which include refraining from political activity and avoiding even the appearance of impropriety.
While at a law conference in South Africa, the notorius RBG commented that she preferred their 960 page constitution to the very short US Constitution. She should have been removed from the Supreme Court right then and there, but of course, there was no uproar here over here.
Her comments and then non-apology just reinforces in the public’s mind that everything is a rigged game and even the Supreme Court is in on it.
The destruction the Left has worked on the American culture and the Rule of Law is massive.
I think the lawlessness of the Left is the thing I find most offensive.
Actually, this is beneficial, as if Trump is elected, she would have to recuse herself from any case involving his administration, since she has now demonstrated a complete lack of impartiality. If she then fails to recuse herself, she opens herself to impeachment.
GB
She should be impeached now. Or at least make it an issue.
I have to say, as time goes on the more I like Trump. He attacks the left where it hurts and throws them off balance. There’s a whole lot of us (myself included) who cannot attack these people directly because our livelihoods can be threatened. (Please Eric, not another lecture; I have one more daughter to get through college and I will not threaten her welfare by becoming “activist”) It makes me, and a lot of others quite mad, as we are powerless to defend ourselves as the Left has a strangle hold on many institutions. Trump is beholden to no one, so is free to call these bastards out for their actions.
Nolanimrod – good one.
I was pleased that some Democrats/liberals did quickly point out that it was inappropriate. It’s also nice to have the others, who took the view that “NO! This was completely appropriate because Trump is Hitler and all good people have to do whatever they can to stop him, even if it means destroying our national traditions” on record, now that she herself has said it wasn’t right.
I thought it was a decent apology. It used the mild and respectful language appropriate to a SCOTUS justice – which she failed to do the first time, so it feels unbalanced – but she owned responsibility.
A liberal apologized and said she wouldn’t do it again. Mark it on your calendars.
Cornhead,
At this time the possibility of impeachment is less than zero.
She has to DO something concrete, not merely reveal her bias.
When there is an actual case, a refusal to recuse herself, when impartiality is demonstrably compromised is the least that is required for impeachment to be sustainable. Even then, the left will fight it tooth and claw.
Ginsburg is not going to be impeached, nor will she resign until hrc is in the Oval Office.
She worked for the ACLU so she should never have been approved for the supreme court. Just remember, the ACLU was founded by a communist. The 1943 California Senate Fact-Finding Committee on Un-American Activities reported that the ACLU “may be definitely classed as a communist front.”
Paul –
“She should have been removed from the Supreme Court right then and there…”
Why? I’ve heard this argument before and never understood it. A judge isn’t bound to like the law. She’s bound to apply it. I’d imagine that each justice would love to sit down with the Constitution and an exacto knife and go to town. Wanting to doesn’t make her a bad justice.
It might seem like I’m making a mountain out of a molehill, but this really is the heart of the matter. Her mistake wasn’t in having political views, it was in putting them before her job. People who have been defending her are saying that she’s right and she’s passionate about protecting the country. If that’s the case, then she should quit her job and go defend the country however she thinks is fitting. That’s her option. But a Supreme Court justice is obligated to put duty over political opinion.
Cornhead Says:
July 14th, 2016 at 2:57 pm
Her comments and then non-apology just reinforces in the public’s mind that everything is a rigged game and even the Supreme Court is in on it.
The destruction the Left has worked on the American culture and the Rule of Law is massive.
I think the lawlessness of the Left is the thing I find most offensive.
* * *
At least she finally came out in the open, as opposed to the ones who believe exactly the same thing and are TOO SMART to say so out loud. She probably IS losing her mind (although, as Paul said, this is not her first gaffe), or at least losing her inhibitions, since there now seems to be NO negative consequences for admitting that the Left is Lawless (but heaven help anyone not part of their Victim Groups who breaks the smallest – or most inane – regulation that they approve of).
(CAPS are faster than sticking in the XHTML codes for emphasis).
GB
Years ago I read Raoul Berger’s book on impeachment. It was published during Nixon’s day. The phrase “high crimes and misdemeanors” doesn’t mean what most people think. It is a political remedy for abuse of power.
I know impeachment is a harsh remedy but we need to play hard ball with the Left.
I love it when Power Line agrees with me:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/07/ginsburg-apologizes-for-attacks-on-trump.php
I love it when Power Line agrees with me:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2016/07/ginsburg-apologizes-for-attacks-on-trump.php
(continued)
“In fact, Ginsburg’s attacks on Trump were not just “ill-advised,” as she put it, they were flatly inconsistent with Canon 5.
Once again, as we have seen many times over the last year, Trump has inspired such crazed hate in his political opponents that they go too far, ultimately benefiting him. In commenting on Ginsburg’s attacks on him, Trump said “her mind is shot.” That may be putting it too crudely, but there have been serious concerns about Ginsburg’s health for a long time. It is hard to believe that a justice fully in possession of her senses would have exposed her rank partisanship in interviews with the New York Times and CNN, as Ginsburg did.”
physicsguy,
You’re powerless by choice.
The con worked:
“Trump is beholden to no one, so is free to call these bastards out for their actions.”
“They highlight how biased the reporting is–so much so that a few people are defecting, at least ever-so-slightly, from the pack. “ – Neo
Noticing this too, on a bit by bit basis.
Probably only from those who do have a sense of “fairness” outweighing their need/desire to push an agenda.
Doubtful we will ever get to anything close to a “balanced” view point.
Worth looking at for the image of the magazine cover:
http://nypost.com/2016/07/14/ruth-bader-ginsburgs-regrets-dont-cut-it/