Notorious RBG vs. The Insult Comedian

The latest. and oddest, campaign controversy is between two elderly New Yorkers:

Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s well-known candor was on display in her chambers late Monday, when she declined to retreat from her earlier criticism of Donald Trump and even elaborated on it.

“He is a faker,” she said of the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, going point by point, as if presenting a legal brief. “He has no consistency about him. 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? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.”

“I can’t imagine what this place would be — I can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president,” she said. “For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be — I don’t even want to contemplate that.”

It reminded her of something her husband, Martin D. Ginsburg, a prominent tax lawyer who died in 2010, would have said.

“‘Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand,’” Justice Ginsburg said, smiling ruefully.

There’s been much tut-tutting among pundits and law professors about Ginsburg’s comments in response to a questions from the media. They may be unusual but SCOTUS is an inherently political body. And it’s not like the Supremes have never gotten directly involved in Presidential elections. Anyone recall Bush v. Gore? You know, the case that elected George W Bush and changed the course of history. Then there was the time Justice Charles Evans Hughes resigned his seat to become the GOP nominee in 1916. I think Woodrow Wilson would have called that political. In fact, he did in the course of defeating Hughes.

The Insult Comedian with cotton candy piss hair’s response to RBG is typically unhinged:

Did the mean old octogenarian hurt the poor widdle rich kids’ feelings? Good. He was so butt-hurt that he forgot to say “so sad” and was sparing with the “verys” and exclamation points. Perhaps he’s the one who’s losing his mind. Nah, it was lost to his ego sometime in the 1980’s. At least the tweet wasn’t anti-Semitic, that’s real progress for the Donald.

This whole flap is most amusing. I wonder if anyone in the House will follow the example of sainted moderate Jerry Ford and try to impeach the Notorious RBG as he did with Bill Douglas. Of course, they’d have to admit to supporting Trump, which many of them are loath to do.

Despite all the huffing and puffing-most disappointingly by Slate’s Mark Joseph Stern who’s usually wiser than this-there’s no ethical violation here. The judicial code cited by RBG’s critics does not apply to the Supremes; whether or not that’s a good thing is for another day. Justice Ginsburg was asked a question and answered it in the blunt, direct manner for which she’s renown. If Chief Justice Roberts calls her on the carpet, I’d love to be a fly on the wall of his chambers:

Roberts: Why the hell did you say that, Ruthie, baby? (I’m pretty sure he doesn’t call her that but that’s how we’d say it in New Orleans.)

RBG: He’s a loudmouthed menace who makes Nino look sensible. Do you want him appointing half the Court? Surely, you’re not voting for this racist clown.

The key to understanding RBG’s comments is this: the next President could appoint up to five Justices if they serve two terms. That would be the most of any President since Eisenhower who picked well under the tutelage of Tom Dewey’s man, Herbert Brownell. There are no steady, well-informed hands on Team Trump. Just imagine the venerable ratfucker Roger Stone helping to pick Supremes. The mind reels.

Let’s raise a glass to the Notorious RBG who’s willing to take the heat to help prevent Trump from becoming the first Insult Comedian to be elected President. Never gonna happen, my friend.

 Since RBG mentioned New Zealand, I’ll give Neil Finn and Crowded House the last word. Btw, this song is *not* about Trump. He only thinks he’s God:

7 thoughts on “Notorious RBG vs. The Insult Comedian

  1. Here’s the rule: If someone is “outraged” by Justice Ginsburg’s comments, they should not be heard unless they were similarly outraged by Justice Scalia going off on a duck hunting trip to Louisiana with Vice President Cheney while Cheney had a case that was in the pipeline on its way to the Supreme Court. Scalia’s response to the appearance of impropriety was basically, “Fuck off; I’ll do what I want.”

    And don’t even get me started on Justice Thomas failing to recuse himself from cases that involve parties that employ his wife.

    1. You nailed it. mon ami. This is not a time for good people to stay silent. Not sure if Trump is a bona fide American fascist but I’m not sure that he’s not.

  2. Three cheers for Justice Ginsburg. I can’t imagine a Trump presidency nor a Supreme Court with a majority appointed by Trump. Ginsburg is Jewish, and she was right to speak out.

    I don’t know why Democrats are not flogging Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns. I seriously doubt he will ever do it, because there’s too much that would make him look bad, very bad.

    1. “I don’t know why Democrats are not flogging Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns.”

      The technical term is ‘target-rich environment’. Really, with only 24 hours in a day, they have to prioritize.

    2. “I don’t know why Democrats are not flogging Trump’s refusal to release his tax returns. ”

      Even if they did, our trusty news media will not give two s**ts. They are more interested in the latest non-scandal involving Hillary. And of course on the far Left there’s the constant drumbeat about how Hillary is so much worse than Trump so of course we have to plunk everything down on Jill Stein and if the country goes to Trump–so what? Revolution in 2020!! (if we’re alive then).

      I need a drink.

  3. as much as i love the Notorious RGB, i have do disagree with her description of il Doiuche as “a fake.” i believe he is sincerely a narcissistic asshole.

Comments are closed.