The Coming Collusion Bloodbath

Special Counsel Mueller

The firing of Andrew McCabe, the discovery of his “private notes,” the ill-tempered response by other Obama loyalists and a yet to be disclosed Inspector General’s report on an investigation that began before Donald Trump had come to office are all pieces of a story that dwarfs the still absent evidence of anything Trump and company did to cooperate with Russians in changing votes in Michigan and Wisconsin.

So many Democrats and Republicans have asserted the lack of evidence in the Russian collusion issue its become comical if not annoying to endure as the uninformed continue to argue otherwise.

But few have had interest in addressing a separate issue that demands attention. For while the Russians attempted mass chaos.

The more serious scandal appears to have covered up criminal behavior, illicit manipulation of the FISA process, and an attempt to undo the quite serious results of an election.

Is there anything more sacred in our representative republic?

The scandal that goes mostly unmentioned began before the election had even occurred but appears to have continued well past the final results of election night, with one candidate winning 30 of 50 states, and racking up a 304 to 227 victory in the electoral college.

A victory that looks increasingly historic in light of what increasingly appears to be the collusion of the then current administration with one campaign, and in instance after instance attempting to push their thumb on the scale of the outcome.

The Democrats’ illicit partnership with the Obama Justice Department and what appears to be an increasingly corrupted leadership at the Federal Bureau of Investigation was yet one more logistical hurdle that President Trump would have to overcome in his surprising and transformational win.

Few remember, though my radio show discussed at length, the reports that surfaced in October of 2016.

In reaction to the bizarre July 5thannouncement by then FBI director James Comey, FBI officials revealed that members of the DOJ and FBI investigative teams that had worked the Hillary email case were “angered & disgusted” that the co-opted DOJ and FBI leadership ignored the very real analysis of evidence and decided against bringing criminal indictment against Hillary Clinton for the handling of top secret information.

More than 100 FBI agents that worked the case, and more than 6 DOJ attorneys expressed their disgust, according to a source within the group.

It was later revealed that Comey had been prepared to exonerate Clinton in February of that year when he would yet not interview her until months later. She was also granted an interview, instead of being asked to testify under oath.

We discovered later that Team Hillary’s operation paid for opposition research on Trump that included the hiring of a disgraced British ex-spy, a law firm attached to Hillary, and a collection of accusations largely originating from Russian sources.

This dossier was mostly discredited upon it’s discovery. Yet this partisan piece of opposition research for a campaign formed the basis for secretive surveillance on Trump campaign members and was continually extended.

The other rationales for the FISA warrants included sources that also traced back to Hillary Clinton, one of them being a significant donor to the Clinton foundation.

Yet that disgraced ex-spy remained on retainer by the FBI beyond the discovery that the dossier was in large measure useless. Why would the Obama administration have him there at all?

Enter the illicit relationship between agents Strzok and Page, and the fact that from before election night, to well afterwards it appears a coordinated effort to undo the election results were thought to be a backstop by then Deputy Director McCabe and you have the elements leading the investigation into all of it that wilfully leaked information (a crime in itself) to the press that slanted in a decidedly pro-Hillary and anti-Trump direction.

Shuffle into the mix Loretta Lynch meeting with Bill Clinton on a tarmac, Dr. Susan Rice penning an imaginative “record” of a President “instructing” investigators to play it “by the book,” Comey penning what should be considered classified and protected notes of conversations he had with the new President and then wholesale gives them to people outside of government and this weekend Deputy Director McCabe admitting to evidently employing a similar practice.

Add to the mix conflicting testimony from former director Comey before Congress on back to back highly publicized visits.

What the universe has truly ignored is the fact that the Inspector General’s investigation (which has been far less publicized than Special Council Robert Mueller’s), and in large measure has had much more devastating impact.

Agents have been fired, reassigned, and otherwise dealt with just within the process of the investigation.

The limited amount of what we’ve seen from the efforts thus far have painted a picture of corruption at the highest levels, and potentially “Watergate” comparable outcomes upon the report’s issuance.

McCabe’s firing was directly linked to the IG’s findings, and once revealed to the Justice Department’s disciplinary powers a concurrent recommendation was termination.

That Comey, McCabe, and others have practiced an obvious double standard in the email case of Hillary Clinton where ample evidence caused 106 of the case agents and attorneys working on the case to believe indictment would occur, and simultaneously going to such extraordinary measures through the assistance of essentially Hillary’s campaign operation to attempt to thwart the outcome of the election is more than enough reason to go after them on a criminal basis alone.

That McCabe reportedly lied to the low key Inspector General, while attempting to send General Michael Flynn to prison for lying to the same FBI is of highest hypocrisy.

But hypocrisy is what Comey, McCabe, Strzok, and others seem especially gifted at.

In some respects Robert Mueller never asked for the position he finds himself in. But if he is not willing to look at the evidence before him and truly follow where it leads then it is time for him to go as well.

There was collusion in the election of 2016. It involved Russians, a British ex-spy, law firms, FBI agents, DOJ attorneys, an FBI director that prejudged evidence, an Attorney General that had an unethical meeting with the spouse of a target, FISA warrants obtained on faulty information that stemmed from political sources, a Deputy Director whose wife received monetary support in an election, an FBI director who lied to Congress, an FBI Deputy Director who lied to the Justice Department’s Inspector General, loads of classified materials that were mishandled and criminally passed to those without clearances, and partisan hacks spearheading inquiries aiming for political outcomes.

The scope of this collusion is overwhelming, the attempts are a damning indictment of political operatives that have lost all integrity, and sadly an administration, a major political party, and agents of a deep state that attempted in a wide sweeping number of ways to undo an election that they lost.

Former high-ranking FBI officials (like Chris Swetzer who appeared with Harris Faulkner’s FoxNews broadcast on Friday) believe that the Inspector General’s coming report will be explosive.

Nolte: Threats Against Trump Made By John Brennan And Samantha Power Must Be Investigated

threats against Trump

Two ominous tweets, one written by former CIA Director John Brennan, the other by former United Nations Ambassador Samantha Power, openly threaten a sitting president — President Trump. This must be investigated.

Both of these tweets raise enormous questions, not only about what is meant by these threats, but what kind of inside information these former Obama officials might be receiving from unauthorized sources.

Friday night, after the long overdue firing of Andrew McCabe, the disgraced former acting FBI director, the president tweeted to the American people that McCabe’s termination (and possible loss of pension) marks a “great day for the hard working men and women of the FBI – A great day for Democracy.”

Trump added that “James Comey … made McCabe look like a choirboy. He knew all about the lies and corruption going on at the highest levels of the FBI!”

James Comey is disgraced former head of the FBI fired by Trump last year.

Trump’s criticism of Comey is not speculation. We now know that Comey leaked internal memos about his alleged conversations with Trump to the media through a surrogate, an act that many believe violated FBI rules, possibly even rules surrounding classified information.

Moreover, Comey’s greasy fingerprints appear to be all over the discredited Russian dossier and the FISA warrants obtained using the dossier to spy on surrogates of the Trump campaign.

For his part, though, and in keeping with his reputation as a man with a high opinion of himself, Comey responded with a rather anodyne  tweet that was equal parts self-love and salesmanship (his book comes out next month): “Mr. President, the American people will hear my story very soon. And they can judge for themselves who is honorable and who is not.”

Brennan, however, appeared unhinged by Trump’s tweet, but he wants the world to know that he knows something and he knows something will be done about it.

“When the full extent of your venality, moral turpitude, and political corruption becomes known, you will take your rightful place as a disgraced demagogue in the dustbin of history,” Brennan blasted to Trump on Twitter.

“You may scapegoat Andy McCabe, but you will not destroy America…America will triumph over you.”

The question now is what does Brennan know? And where did he get the information that allows him to confidently threaten a sitting president with “disgrace” and a place “in the dustbin of history?”

Brennan’s tweet took on an even more ominous tone after Power later tag-teamed it with this tweet: “Not a good idea to piss off John Brennan,” she warned, with a link to Brennan’s tweet threatening Trump.

Again, Brennan is the former head of the CIA, a man with incalculable residual power through various contacts, not just within the bureaucratic Deep State, but within the wide world of international spycraft.

Power, who is at the center of an ongoing investigation looking into the unprecedented unmasking of American citizens (that possibly included Trump campaign surrogates), obviously believes that Brennan being “pissed off” at Trump means things will now happen, that Trump will pay a price, that Brennan will come out on top.

This is all very ominous, unquestionably a threat, and also makes one wonder if Brennan and Power are receiving unauthorized information, possibly from Robert Mueller’s special counsel office.

Even the mainstream media, firmly in Mueller’s corner in their desire to destroy Trump, have repeatedly reported things that could only have come via leaks from the special counsel’s office.

The very idea that a Brennan and Power, two former Cabinet-level officials in the Obama administration, are publicly hurling not-so-veiled threats at a sitting American president, is not only beyond the pale, but must be taken seriously.

It is important to remember that this is not the first time Trump has been threatened with Deep State reprisal.

In January of last year,  Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, (D-NY) seemed to gloat over the fact that the intelligence community has “six ways from Sunday at getting back at you” — meaning Trump.

In February, Phil Mudd, a CNN counter-terrorism analyst, publicly warned Trump that the F.B.I would seek revenge against Trump and “win.”

This is the rhetoric of a state run by an un-elected secret police force, not a representative democracy where the intelligence community is supposed to answer to the people through our elected representatives.

Only a new special counsel can look into these threats. The Secret Service might also want to get itself involved. 

Report: American Poll Reveals The Floor Just Dropped Out Under Super-Sanctuary California

Jerry Brown

Liberals like to pretend they are on the side of the American people. Even more ridiculous, they think America is on their side.

But we all know the truth. Democrats rejected American values a long time ago. Along with the American people. Their agenda conflicts with everything we believe in.

Just take sanctuary cities, especially those defiant cities and counties in California. Those Liberals really believe Americans are on board with their treasonous policies. A new poll, however, exposes just how alone they are.

From Breitbart:

Nearly 55 percent of American likely voters say states should not be allowed to ignore federal law, as the state of California has decided to ignore federal immigration laws and protect criminal illegal aliens…

Meanwhile, less than 24 percent of likely voters said states should be allowed to ignore federal laws they do not like.

Roughly 70 percent of Republican voters said states like California should not be allowed to ignore federal law, while just 38 percent of Democrat voters said the same. Nearly 35 percent of Democrats said states should be allowed to ignore federal law…

Sessions has compared California’s ignoring of federal immigration laws to the Confederacy, telling Breitbart News, “We believe that we cannot accept the kind of restrictions that California placed on federal law officers, and we believe that their actions exceeded the Constitution, and we will win in the courts eventually.”

A key part of this poll is the response from swing voters. Nearly 60% of swing voters said states should not be allowed to ignore federal law. Combined with the rest of the poll, that adds up to quite a few Americans.

It’s insane to think that Americans would support sanctuary cities. The policy protects criminal aliens. It puts American citizens at risk. And it violates federal law.

To think that state government would refuse to cooperate with ICE agents is shocking. The state government is not above the federal law.

Immigration law was put in place to protect America. Sanctuary cities and states are deliberately working against those laws.

This poll suggests that most Americans side with the federal government. California and other states should not violate federal law.

They must cooperate with ICE and other agents. Putting illegal aliens ahead of American citizens is unacceptable.

The only question is: will Liberals pay attention to this poll? Will they retract all of their sanctuary policies? Or will they continue to insult the government and American people?

New Yorker Magazine Under Fire for Body-Shaming Trump

New Yorker magazine under fire

People are slamming New Yorker magazine over its latest magazine cover, which depicts President Trump addressing reporters while completely nude in an attempt to mock his appearance.

The magazine gave a sneak preview Friday of its latest edition and got a flood of responses criticizing the magazine for “body-shaming” the president.

“This cover is an outrage. Donald Trump is the President of the United States. As a lifelong Democrat, I strongly oppose his views but he is still the President of the United States and is due an apology,” one user tweeted. “He is someone’s father husband and friend. He deserves better.”

Another user called the magazine “a junk publication” for treating the president and lifelong New Yorker disrespectfully.

“Imagine the s–t storm had Madame @HillaryClinton won and a magazine had decided to run a cover of her along these lines,” another user wrote.

Members of the media also weighed in on the magazine cover, with some even taking the opportunity to mock the president’s weight.

“My guess is that Trump will not love the new New Yorker cover,” Think Progress editor Judd Legum tweeted.

Washington Post media columnist Erik Wemple penned an entire column praising the cover’s artist for pointing out the size of Trump’s extremities in an apparent jab at the president’s physique.

The trend of “fat-shaming” Trump is nothing new.

Many celebrities and politicians mocked Trump’s weight in January after Navy Rear Adm. Dr. Ronny Jackson, the White House physician, released the results of the president’s physical.

Hollywood director James Gunn offered to give $100,000 to Trump’s favorite charity if the president agreed to weigh himself on “an accurate scale” following his physical exam.

Former Secretary of State John Kerry mocked Trump’s weight at a dinner in Washington, DC, in January shortly after Jackson made the results of Trump’s physical public. Kerry asked that the president release his “girth certificate.”

Mueller Corruption Scandal Breaks WIDE Open—Look What Crime He Buried For Obama

News has been breaking of Russia-connected corruption within the U.S. government. But—surprise, surprise—it has nothing to do with Donald Trump and everything to do with Barack Obama.

Apparently, as Obama’s administration was approving a titanic deal to give Russian companies stack in U.S. uranium, the same Russian individuals were engaged in all sorts of nefarious behavior. Corruption, bribery, and various underhanded activities.

We never learned about it, because it appears the FBI at the time was covering it up. And who was responsible for the cover up? Oh, just the guy leading the Russian investigate today.

From Daily Wire:

Robert Mueller, who is the special counsel in charge of the Russia investigation, oversaw the FBI when the agency allegedly hid evidence it had collected that showed that Russian officials were engaged in a bribery scheme aimed at growing their atomic energy business inside the United States.

The details were outlined in a report on Tuesday which showed that the evidence was withheld even from lawmakers as they questioned the Obama administration’s approval of the sale of Uranium One to Russia’s Rosatom, which led to Russia controlling 20% of U.S. uranium.

Former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI), who chaired the House Intelligence Committee during the time the FBI probe was being conducted, told The Hill that he was never made aware of anything regarding “Russian nuclear corruption,” though many of his fellow lawmakers were concerned about the deal, which was also approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department…

The Russian efforts to manipulate our American political enterprise is breathtaking.

Wow, this is really looking bad for everyone involved. Obama, Clinton, Mueller are all in a big pot of corruption stew. Why were these charged covered up?

Because they didn’t want the deal to get nixed by Congress. So Mueller’s people, during Obama’s authority, hid the evidence to protect the deal.

That’s pretty shady, to me.

It suggests that the administration, and those working for it in the FBI, were all but complicit in the bribery scheme. Perhaps they were beneficiaries of bribery? How can we know, since it was covered up?

All this should lead to an investigation by Congress over just what went on back then. I had a hard time believing nobody will be prosecuted over this revelation. I guess we’ll have to wait and see.


Revealed! Proof Erupts, Obama Lied To America For 8 Years


Everybody realizes that amid Obama’s presidency, employments/monetary numbers were continually distorted to influence him to look great.

Advantageously, vital metrics were overlooked by his attendants in the Labor Department as well as by his lapdogs in the media, who should examine these sorts of things.

Things like labor participation rate and tallying the people that have stopped looking for work by and large would have caused the joblessness number to soar.

Yet, Obama and the Left couldn’t have that.

So they lied, consistently, concealing the genuine strength of our economy and the dismal substances that accompany conceding the certainties about work metrics.

Egotistically, the president bragged about his job numbers, advising his critics to check for themselves.

All things considered, many have, and the numbers demonstrate his pundits were more than correct.

As detailed at Yes I’m Right, after Trump won the election and organizations started promising to return and keep jobs in the US, Josh Earnest, Obama’s press secretary, reduced Trump’s pre-presidential triumphs, saying:

“There were 805,000 manufacturing jobs that were not just protected, but actually created while President Obama was in office.”

A bold claim, and a complete lie.

According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, before Obama’s disastrous presidency began in 2009, there were 12.561 million manufacturing jobs in the US.

As of November 2016, that number had fallen to 12.26 million jobs.

Which, as indicated by the laws of first-grade arithmetic, would imply that more than 300,000 assembling discounted were lost amid his administration.

The inquiry at that point turns out to be: How on earth did Josh “Not really” Earnest thought of such a ludicrous number?

Indeed, he did what the Left dependably does, by winding and twisting things to fit the story.

His strategy was unfortunately unscrupulous, as he just glanced back at Obama’s 8 years in office and found the point where producing jobs were at their lowest, which was in 2010 at 11.453 million.

That is where he began counting jobs “created” by Obama after the president’s garbage policies had effectively shaved off 1.1 million jobs.

This sort of mysterious bookkeeping is the thing that the Left’s about and why you ought to never believe any numbers that originate from the Left, or truly, any government official so far as that is concerned.

What do you think about this? Do not hesitate and write your thoughts in the comment section below.

Thank you for reading.

BOMBSHELL: GOP Officials: PA Special Election Voting Machines ‘Miscalibrated’, Votes ‘Switched’

Democrat candidate Conor Lamb declared victory over Republican Rick Saccone in Pennsylvania’s special election. This, despite no credible outlets calling it for either man.

From The Hill:

Democrat Conor Lamb declared victory early Wednesday morning in his bid for a Pittsburgh-area House special election, although the race hasn’t yet been called.

The district, which voted for President Trump in 2016 by a 20-point margin, was once considered an easy win for Republicans. But Lamb currently leads Republican state Rep. Rick Saccone by 641 ballots, with 100 percent of the precincts reporting, according to The Associated Press.

“It took a little longer than we thought, but we did it. You did it,” Lamb told supporters at his election night party shortly before 1 a.m., after he was introduced as “congressman-elect.”

Republicans are now claiming that voting machines ‘miscalibrated,’ giving Lamb votes that should’ve gone Saccone’s way.

From Washington Free Beacon:

Republicans are citing numerous problems at polling sites in Tuesday’s special election in Pennsylvania, which remains too close to officially call but appears to be trending toward an extremely narrow victory for Democrat Conor Lamb.

Lamb currently leads Republican Rick Saccone by just 627 votes and there are still absentee and provisional ballots that have not been tabulated, but Republicans are already preparing for the likely recount and even a possible lawsuit regarding issues at polling sites, according to a Republican source familiar with the deliberations.


“We’re actively investigating three instances and likely to file court action on them,” the source said.

Among the listed concerns are “miscalibrated” voting machines in Allegheny County, the only county of four in the district that went for Lamb, according to the source, who said there have been many reports of voters who intended to vote for Saccone ending up casting a ballot for Lamb.

The NRCC released this statement…

nrcc statement

More from Western Journal:

The Pennsylvania special election for congressional district 18 may be heading to a recount, with just hundreds of votes separating the Republican and Democrat candidates and irregularities alleged in Democrat heavy Allegheny County.

As of Wednesday midday, 627 votes (0.2 percent) separate Republican Rick Saccone and Democrat Conor Lamb, the New York Times reported.

With hundreds of absentee ballots and an undetermined number of military and provisional ballots yet to be counted, the race is still too close to call.

Sounds like some strange stuff was going on.

The lawyers plan to make multiple complaints that could form the basis of their recount.

One involves allegations that touch screen machines used in heavily Democrat Allegheny County, bordering Pittsburgh, were not calibrated correctly, registering votes for Lamb that were meant for Saccone. The county is the only one of the four counties found in the district that Lamb won.

Another issue is GOP claims that their representatives were blocked from observing the absentee ballot count in Allegheny County.

In every close election, we see reports of shady things going on and we hear talks of possible recounts. However, conservatives are very aware that voter fraud is rampant in the United States.

More from

A Republican source familiar with the campaign said that the GOP planned to petition for the voting machines used in all four counties to be impounded, pending a recount.

It is not yet clear where such a petition would be filed. But Republicans are investigating a number of purported Election Day irregularities including problems with the machines, voters being told to go to the wrong polling places, and Republican attorneys being barred from overseeing the counting of absentee ballots in Allegheny County.

We’ll have to wait and see what happens here.

Either way, no matter who wins, Democrats will try to shape this as a victory for the left. In reality, Lamb does not represent the Democrat Party today.

Democrats can pretend that this is a referendum on Trump all they want. It’s not.

[Note: This post was written by John S. Roberts]

Kellyanne Conway SLAMS Fake Feminist Hillary Clinton … And It’s Freaking EPIC.


I went OFF when I hear about Hillary Clinton saying white women only voted for rump because their husbands told them to…

I’m far from the only Conservative woman with strong feelings about the comment…

Kellyanne was on Fox to talk about Hillary’s mouthgarbage… and she did NOT hold back!

“Let me tell you something, lady: The idea that I or other women like me have to ask our husbands how to vote – it’s really a joke, particularly since… this country knows who you are, first and foremost, because of who you married.”


According to Fox:

Kellyanne Conway called out Hillary Clinton Thursday for claiming Trump voters were looking “backwards” in 2016 and blamed pressure from men for why white women voted for the president.

Conway called out the former secretary of state on “Fox and Friends,” asking her to “stop pretending you’re a feminist, you’re for equality, you’re for fairness to women, and then running around accusing us of checking with our husbands and our significant others before we vote.”

I mean… I just can’t wrap my head around how this bridge troll of a woman thought that comment would go over…

Even the Dems are cringing.

Many – including Democrats up for re-election in tough states – have been critical of Clinton’s comments made at the India Today Conclave.

“She basically is, again, insulting half of the country,” Conway said, adding it’s a “joke” for Clinton to claim that women vote based on their husbands’ views.

“This country knows who you are because of who you married,” said Conway, addressing the former first lady.

Conway said Democrats might want Clinton to stop, but Republicans are hoping she keeps talking about her loss and the president’s supporters.

UH HUH. Just keep spewing, Hill… it’s EXACTLY why Trump won.

So thanks for the favor!

It’s Official: Court Rules – Sanctuary Cities Ban Is Constitutional

In a major victory for President Trump and his quest to enforce the rule of law when it comes to illegal immigration, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Texas’s ban on ‘sanctuary cities’ can proceed.

The unanimous decision by the court’s panel allows states to punish those jurisdictions that fail to cooperate in turning illegal immigrants over to the federal government for deportation.

They ruled that the federal government’s ‘detainer’ requests were, in fact, legal, and the Texas law requires that local authorities comply with them or risk jail time or removal from their position.

Check this out:

Judge Edith H. Jones concluded that opponents of the measure would not succeed on the merits of their case, adding “none of the other challenged provisions of (the law) facially violate the Constitution.”

Texas Governor Greg Abbott celebrated the ruling on social media.

“Allegations of discrimination were rejected,” he wrote. “Law is in effect.”

abbott tweet

The law that bans ‘sanctuary cities’ was passed in May of 2017, with Abbott warning some “sheriffs could wind up behind the very bars they are releasing these criminals from.”

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton praised the Appeals Court ruling, issuing a statement that reads in part, “Enforcing immigration law prevents the release of individuals from custody who have been charged with serious crimes.”

He reiterated that the law banning ‘sanctuary cities’ in his state “is lawful, Constitutional and protects the safety of law enforcement officers and all Texans.”

ken tweet

The law has been fervently defended by Republicans citing one public official in general – Travis County Sheriff Sally Hernandez.

Hernandez vowed on the day President Trump was sworn in to limit cooperation with ICE.

“The public must be confident that local law enforcement is focused on local, public safety, not on federal immigration enforcement,” she said, seemingly unaware that enforcing the law does affect public safety.

Perhaps this is the first elected Democrat who should be removed from office or jailed for refusing to enforce the law.

Are you happy to see the ban on sanctuary cities upheld in Texas? Share your thoughts below!

Game Changer?! Ruth Ginsburg Gets Devastating News, Federal Law Requires …


Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg confronts calls from many corners to recuse herself from the high court’s considerations of President Donald Trump’s brief travel ban order, given her expressed animus toward the CEO.

The Supreme Court set Monday, June 12, as the due date for challenges to the travel ban to present their reactions.

The Trump organization has asked for sped up procedures for the situation, which means a decision to lift or keep set up a Fourth Circuit order blocking implementation of the request could happen moderately soon.

Ginsburg was an extremely vocal adversary of Trump’s presidential candidacy, slandering him in the media on various events the previous summer.

“He is a faker. He has no consistency about him, “she told CNN last July. “He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? ”

At the point when asked by The Associated Press how the Supreme Court may be influenced by a Trump administration, she stated:  “I do not want to think about that possibility, but if it should be, then everything is up for grabs.”

Days later Ginsburg told The New York Times, “I can not imagine what this place would be – I can not imagine what the country would be – with Donald Trump as our president.”

She included that the possibility of Trump as president helped her to remember something her late spouse used to state: “Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.”

Gregg Jarrett in a piece for Fox News notes that federal law requires that “[a] ny justice … shall disqualify himself [or herself] in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. He shall also disqualify himself … where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party. ”

Moreover, lawyer David Weisberg in an opinion piece distributed in The Hill on Monday composes that the legal Code of Conduct is clear in regards to Ginsburg’s hostile to Trump articulations and her need to recuse herself in the travel ban case.

The code expresses that a judge ought not “publicly endorse or oppose a candidate for public office.”

The code further states that “[a] judge … should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.”

On July 13 The New York Times editorial board rebuked Ginsburg after her arrangement of hostile to Trump comments, expressing that “Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg needs to drop the political punditry and the name-calling.”

After a day, Ginsburg issued an announcement:

“On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised, and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect. ”

The previous fall liberal Harvard law educator Allen Dershowitz said that Ginsburg ought to recuse herself from all cases including President Trump, given her past explanations.

Jarrett finishes up his opinion piece, “The noble traditions of the Supreme Court will be compromised should Ruth Bader Ginsburg decide she is above the law and beyond the scruples it demands.”

What do you think about this? Do not hesitate and write your thoughts in the comment section below.

Thank you for reading.

Recent Posts