Law Justice Alito allegedly had a ‘Stop the Steal’ symbol on display at his house

[ColemanwastheGOAT]

I'm hopping back to Mayberry to post funny book pictures and talk about poop.

 

[Sinister]

It’s crazy, it’s like they have this weird pride where they feel like once they nominate someone, it’s a terrible defeat to admit they were wrong so they’d rather go with a probable POS.

No, the Federalist Society are pretty clear in that all the care about is someone with a pulse who will further their agenda. Doesnt matter if they were an alcoholic date-rapist in College. Doesnt matter if they were a serial pervert who consistently abused power. Doesnt matter if they're literally in a cult that demands that they run all their decisions by their spouse, as long as that spouse is their kind of religious idealog. McConnell once publicly stated their Mantra, to yet the Country you desire you must capture the courts. This is exactly what he meant. And this isn't the first time there has been a conservative activist Court (which is what they ALWAYS accuse their opposition of doing just for disagreeing with them), I mean one of them literally have the Presidency to a Republican because they knew the Democrat nominee would be nice about it. Another one opposed almost all legislation during the Civil Rights movement. The Court has had to be threatened into compliance numerous times. This Court just finally believes that will not happen at all.

 

[Sinister]

Tl/cr seems more like it.

You called me back, I answered your call, then you come to me with this weakness? Sad Mark, sad indeed.

I'm hopping back to Mayberry to post funny book pictures and talk about poop.

You stay here and fight the endless battle to own us libs one day you will post something so ingenius all of us will see the light and convert. You just got to keep posting dude, you'll get that magic post one day soon I'm sure of it.

That goof isn't likely to be able to name a single case RBG decided as an "activist." The truth is RBG's impartiality and eloquence in arguing her position was so revered that Scalia had an intense admiration for her to the extent that he was known for showering her with gifts of appreciation, and he was an ideological wacko

 

[ocfightfan]

The Republicans need to start dispatching activists to harass the liberal justices like the left wing pieces of shit do towards the conservative ones. I will bet they find things that will have far more substance to impeach them than the nonsense from the other side.

 

[avenue94]

The Republicans need to start dispatching activists to harass the liberal justices like the left wing pieces of shit do towards the conservative ones. I will bet they find things that will have far more substance to impeach them than the nonsense from the other side.

You mean like Judicial Watch or any of Mr. O'Keefe's ill-fated endeavors?

 

[BFoe]

LOL. Okay, so your entire case for accepting SCJ nominees, is that they don't get mad when they're being accused of being a gang rapist from their political opponents? Fuck his qualifications, right? Circus rules.

Ah, so now that’s my entire case??

Discussing American politics with you is like handing a paintbrush to an orangutan: it’s oddly charming to watch your crude, clumsy, brush strokes, but Van Gogh you’ll never be.

You know exactly what it means. Kavanaugh was confirmed, despite the bullshit your team flung at him. You're clearly still seething about it.

As opposed to say, finding a nominee who isn’t accused of sexual assault by multiple people and melting down in the middle of their confirmation hearing? The only one seething was Kavanaugh. Well, maybe women too, but one would have to assume they are used to Republicans treating them like second class citizens. If they weren’t then, they are now.

No, you just don't think he should receive a big punishment. In the face of you rallying against gun laws at every opportunity, it's rather convenient that you find Hunter Biden lying on all sorts of forms to get a gun, nothing more than a bit of a "whoopsie".

You're a shameless hack, dude. Argue against it all you want. Your own words betray you.

Hunter Biden should not get a big punishment, that’s is correct. The thing you are not understanding, or probably pretending not to understand, is that I don’t have a huge problem with the law itself. Rather, I’m discussing how the sentencing guidelines for this particular law should be applied.

I’ll put it simply in the hopes that you can comprehend it:
the minimum sentence for each of these offenses is a simple fine. In what instances would that be appropriate, in your estimation?

The answer of course, would be circumstances in which it was somebody’s first offense, there was an insignificant number of firearms involved, they weren’t used in the commission of a serious crime, and no one was hurt or killed by the weapons in question. I think fines and probation, or maybe a suspended sentence contingent on completing probation and community service or something is more than appropriate here.

Now with that said, this judge has been fairly harsh in the past. There was a case in which a man lied on a form about which state he lived in, bought 3 guns, and transported them to CA, as part of what the prosecution alleges was firearms trafficking. The prosecution asked for 6 months in jail, and the judge doubled it and gave the dude a year, which is fairly irregular. But again, that involved multiple weapons as part of a larger crime.
But I think it’s indicative; if a dude facing more serious shit was looking at 6 months to a year, I wouldn’t expect some massive prison sentence for Hunter.

 

[CantCucktheTuck]

Wait, We’ve Been Flying the Flag the Alitos Had? San Francisco Takes It Down.

Critics slammed Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. after the “Appeal to Heaven” flag was flown outside his vacation home, but it had billowed in the heart of San Francisco for 60 years.

www.nytimes.com

Been in front of San Fransico's city hall for 60 years.

cry more

 

[Whippy McGee]

Can anyone cite a ruling by Alito that comes off as outside the conduct of a SCOTUS justice?

 

[Mack Yancy]

"Nonsense" he says. Gleefully ignoring that the Dems tried to frame him as a gang rape leader...

"If you slander the guy into responding in kind, he should quit!"

LOL. You're just mad that all the Dems' bullshit didn't work.

Why do you continue to pretend like the cyber ninjas don't exist?

 

[Sinister]

Can anyone cite a ruling by Alito that comes off as outside the conduct of a SCOTUS justice?

Well, lying about your intentions should definitely be considered outside the conduct:



And then going on to make overtly political statements about world leaders while being celebrating yourself for that:



Oh and then there's ruling that private groups can no longer use for violations of the Voting Rignts Act. Not to mention that Alito is expressly on favor of almost every case that comes out of the 5th circuit, which, as an example, struck down the SEC's ability to oversee investment funds in an effort to create more transparency for things like stock buy-backs. In other words it's very clear that Alito favors the wealthy when it comes to rulings, and religious ideologies.

P.S. - Alito has been showered with gifts by billionaire Paul Singer, who is brought a case before the Court which required the overturning of previous SCOTUS positions:

Justice Samuel Alito Took Luxury Fishing Vacation With GOP Billionaire Who Later Had Cases Before the Court

In the years after the undisclosed trip to Alaska, Republican megadonor Paul Singer’s hedge fund has repeatedly had business before the Supreme Court. Alito has never recused himself.

www.propublica.org

 

[Whippy McGee]

Well, lying about your intentions should definitely be considered outside the conduct:



And then going on to make overtly political statements about world leaders while being celebrating yourself for that:



Oh and then there's ruling that private groups can no longer use for violations of the Voting Rignts Act. Not to mention that Alito is expressly on favor of almost every case that comes out of the 5th circuit, which, as an example, struck down the SEC's ability to oversee investment funds in an effort to create more transparency for things like stock buy-backs. In other words it's very clear that Alito favors the wealthy when it comes to rulings, and religious ideologies.

P.S. - Alito has been showered with gifts by billionaire Paul Singer, who is brought a case before the Court which required the overturning of previous SCOTUS positions:

Justice Samuel Alito Took Luxury Fishing Vacation With GOP Billionaire Who Later Had Cases Before the Court

In the years after the undisclosed trip to Alaska, Republican megadonor Paul Singer’s hedge fund has repeatedly had business before the Supreme Court. Alito has never recused himself.

www.propublica.org

All kosher. Just because you don't like the rulings... doesn't make them bad rulings. Now comes the fun part. How did the other 8 justices rule in those that have your upset?

 

[BFoe]

Can anyone cite a ruling by Alito that comes off as outside the conduct of a SCOTUS justice?

All kosher. Just because you don't like the rulings... doesn't make them bad rulings. Now comes the fun part. How did the other 8 justices rule in those that have your upset?

You’re asking the wrong question from the start. The question to ask is, ‘what conduct of Alito’s is outside the boundaries of the SCOTUS’s Code of Conduct or the federal judicial ethics laws on which they are based’?

—So, Alito should not be accepting luxury vacations and travel from a billionaire GOP donor like Paul Singer.
—He certainly shouldn’t be doing it without reporting it, which he did.
—If he’s in doubt over whether to report it, he should use the resources available to him to determine that, which he did not even attempt to do.
—Most importantly, he should’ve recused when Singer had business before the Court.

All of this violates the Code of Conduct: Canon 1A, 1B, 2A, possibly 3(c), 3B(6), and maybe 3C(1)(a).

 

[Sinister]

All kosher. Just because you don't like the rulings... doesn't make them bad rulings. Now comes the fun part. How did the other 8 justices rule in those that have your upset?

I tend to dislike rulings where the constitutionality on them are dubious, at-best. Alito subscribes to that "constortuonal originalism" nonsense, which is so absurd there have only been 2 or 3 other Justices who subscribed to it as well, and they were also unapologetic corporatists with sugar Daddies (Scalia, who died on a luxury quail hunting trip).

You specifically asked about Alito, who in the majority opinion on overturning Roe specifically relegated stare decisis isnt really a thing, based purely on his ideological position on a single issue. But its nice to see that you think that, rendering decisions that spit in the face of our constitutional right to organize, redress grievances, and blatant favoritism of the wealthy who he takes lavish gifts from is "all kosher" because he renders rulings you agree with.

 

[Sinister]

You’re asking the wrong question from the start. The question to ask is, ‘what conduct of Alito’s is outside the boundaries of the SCOTUS’s Code of Conduct or the federal judicial ethics laws on which they are based’?

—So, Alito should not be accepting luxury vacations and travel from a billionaire GOP donor like Paul Singer.
—He certainly shouldn’t be doing it without reporting it, which he did.
—If he’s in doubt over whether to report it, he should use the resources available to him to determine that, which he did not even attempt to do.
—Most importantly, he should’ve recused when Singer had business before the Court.

All of this violates the Code of Conduct: Canon 1A, 1B, 2A, possibly 3(c), 3B(6), and maybe 3C(1)(a).

Its noteworthy thar Lindsey Graham has already pledged to block any and all effort of Democrats to bring forth legislation that would apply an enforceable code of ethics on the SCOTUS.

All kosher tho

 

[BFoe]

Its noteworthy thar Lindsey Graham has already pledged to block any and all effort of Democrats to bring forth legislation that would apply an enforceable code of ethics on the SCOTUS.

All kosher tho

He’s such a slimy little invertebrate.

 

[Whippy McGee]

You’re asking the wrong question from the start. The question to ask is, ‘what conduct of Alito’s is outside the boundaries of the SCOTUS’s Code of Conduct or the federal judicial ethics laws on which they are based’?

—So, Alito should not be accepting luxury vacations and travel from a billionaire GOP donor like Paul Singer.
—He certainly shouldn’t be doing it without reporting it, which he did.
—If he’s in doubt over whether to report it, he should use the resources available to him to determine that, which he did not even attempt to do.
—Most importantly, he should’ve recused when Singer had business before the Court.

All of this violates the Code of Conduct: Canon 1A, 1B, 2A, possibly 3(c), 3B(6), and maybe 3C(1)(a).

Meanwhile, what is Pelosi's net worth?

When government power is all used against the out of power party... you're a fascist.

 

[Whippy McGee]

I tend to dislike rulings where the constitutionality on them are dubious, at-best. Alito subscribes to that "constortuonal originalism" nonsense, which is so absurd there have only been 2 or 3 other Justices who subscribed to it as well, and they were also unapologetic corporatists with sugar Daddies (Scalia, who died on a luxury quail hunting trip).

You specifically asked about Alito, who in the majority opinion on overturning Roe specifically relegated stare decisis isnt really a thing, based purely on his ideological position on a single issue. But its nice to see that you think that, rendering decisions that spit in the face of our constitutional right to organize, redress grievances, and blatant favoritism of the wealthy who he takes lavish gifts from is "all kosher" because he renders rulings you agree with.

Bullshit.

Roe v Wade was always bad law on based on nothing. It was always a state's right issue and a power grab by the feds with Roe.

 

[HereticBD]

As opposed to say, finding a nominee who isn’t accused of sexual assault by multiple people and melting down in the middle of their confirmation hearing?

Accusations? LOL, no. Of course you'd love it...as long as drumming up some busted hag to accuse your boys of sexual assault never happens. No, I don't think unfounded criminal accusations should disqualify anybody.

You don't like the guy because he's not on your team. That's what your entire position is based on, and you know it. If roles were reversed, you'd laugh it off and be going on about "hard evidence", like you do with Biden and his scandals. Maybe he shouldn't have been President, because he was accused of sexual assault by some chick, right? What about all the times angry Biden rears his head and starts insulting and arguing with people who don't like him? I guess that's all she wrote for him, right?

I have no interest in your complete hypocrisy over gun laws, because the convicted dipshit son of the President is on your team.

 

[BFoe]

Meanwhile, what is Pelosi's net worth?

When government power is all used against the out of power party... you're a fascist.

“B-b-but meanwhile….”





Boy, didn’t take you long to abandon the question you asked and just start panic wrestling.

“Out of power party”? Bud, you control the House. The Senate is 50-50, and that’s only because of 2 independents that caucus with Dems. Your wackjob House reps have been running some wannabe impeachment inquiry for like a year-and-a-half with nothing found yet no end in sight, have impeached Mayorkas for supposedly doing nothing about the border while they actively refuse to do anything about the border, are now holding Garland in contempt because he won’t release audio they have no right to but desperately want to try and use for campaign fodder….

What world do you even live in?

 

[BFoe]

Accusations? LOL, no. Of course you'd love it...as long as drumming up some busted hag to accuse your boys of sexual assault never happens. No, I don't think unfounded criminal accusations should disqualify anybody.

You don't like the guy because he's not on your team. That's what your entire position is based on, and you know it. If roles were reversed, you'd laugh it off and be going on about "hard evidence", like you do with Biden and his scandals. Maybe he shouldn't have been President, because he was accused of sexual assault by some chick, right?

I have no interest in your complete hypocrisy over gun laws, because the convicted dipshit son of the President is on your team.

Aww, you don’t wanna play judge? But you love judging people, this is your jam.

I’ll ask again: In what instances would you as a judge, apply the bare minimum sentence for these charges?