Alito displayed a “stop the steal” symbol at his home

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Justice Alito, that neutral caller of balls and strikes, gives an exclusive response to Fox News.

Actually there is no excuse or valid explanation for Alito. SCOTUS just needs to ignore vulgar language and rise above partisanship.

Personally, he may want to reflect on why this sort of vitriol was directed at him and his spouse and whether he can strive to be the person his neighbor expects him to be.

Oh, thanks for the laugh! Yes, I'm sure his ultra-LWNJ neighbors are simply paragons of virtue and goodness - true role models! Spare us all. No one wants to live next door to rabid nutjobs like his neighbors.

Love thy neighbor much?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Justice Alito, that neutral caller of balls and strikes, gives an exclusive response to Fox News.

Actually there is no excuse or valid explanation for Alito. SCOTUS just needs to ignore vulgar language and rise above partisanship.

Personally, he may want to reflect on why this sort of vitriol was directed at him and his spouse and whether he can strive to be the person his neighbor expects him to be.

Oh, thanks for the laugh! Yes, I'm sure his ultra-LWNJ neighbors are simply paragons of virtue and goodness - true role models! Spare us all. No one wants to live next door to rabid nutjobs like his neighbors.

Love thy neighbor much?

Not those neighbors, sorry. Truth hurts, I guess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has a right to free speech because, get this, Supreme Court justices are US citizens.

It’s his private property.

Thank you very much. In the omnibus corrupt Supreme Court thread I said this is what your side would try as an excuse.

Really? Defending free speech now is an excuse?

Anyways, here is link to the hatch act.

Please read it. Alito did nothing wrong.

https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx

So you're suggesting that they needed to add a bullet to cover federal employees supporting an insurrection? I'm not sure they had that much foresight that this was needed when pulling this legislation together.

Both he and his wife are allowed free speech. They did this on their own property. His wife is allowed to be her own person - he does not own her and she is not bound to the SCOTUS ethics.

Believe it or not, woman can have their own opinions.

Hahahaha. This former general’s wife thinks this is hysterically naive. The fun thing about being married to guys like this is that at we don’t get all the ethics training they get but we can 100% make mistakes that end their careers.

Military wives (not being sexist here- I'm a female vet but being realistic, generals are overwhelmingly male) are completely different from spouses of senior government officials. Most government agencies have no-- none-- null training for spouses. The nature of the work is such that a spouse may never have any contact with the agency or any representatives of the agency aside from the spouse. Moreover, it's common that the non-governmental spouse is the one making (often much) more money. It's one thing to ask a SAHM Military spouse to get on board. It's a completely different thing to tell a spouse making 10x the salary of the government official that they can't express political opinions. Especially when there are no actual legal requirements for them to censor themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Justice Alito, that neutral caller of balls and strikes, gives an exclusive response to Fox News.

Actually there is no excuse or valid explanation for Alito. SCOTUS just needs to ignore vulgar language and rise above partisanship.

Personally, he may want to reflect on why this sort of vitriol was directed at him and his spouse and whether he can strive to be the person his neighbor expects him to be.

Oh, thanks for the laugh! Yes, I'm sure his ultra-LWNJ neighbors are simply paragons of virtue and goodness - true role models! Spare us all. No one wants to live next door to rabid nutjobs like his neighbors.

No the neighbors were black and did not have a yard sign. Though no one wants to live next to a rabid nut jobs like Alito.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Justice Alito, that neutral caller of balls and strikes, gives an exclusive response to Fox News.

Actually there is no excuse or valid explanation for Alito. SCOTUS just needs to ignore vulgar language and rise above partisanship.

Personally, he may want to reflect on why this sort of vitriol was directed at him and his spouse and whether he can strive to be the person his neighbor expects him to be.

Oh, thanks for the laugh! Yes, I'm sure his ultra-LWNJ neighbors are simply paragons of virtue and goodness - true role models! Spare us all. No one wants to live next door to rabid nutjobs like his neighbors.

And I am confident very few want to live next door to Justice A-hole or Justice T-head.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has a right to free speech because, get this, Supreme Court justices are US citizens.

It’s his private property.

Thank you very much. In the omnibus corrupt Supreme Court thread I said this is what your side would try as an excuse.

Really? Defending free speech now is an excuse?

Anyways, here is link to the hatch act.

Please read it. Alito did nothing wrong.

https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx

So you're suggesting that they needed to add a bullet to cover federal employees supporting an insurrection? I'm not sure they had that much foresight that this was needed when pulling this legislation together.

Both he and his wife are allowed free speech. They did this on their own property. His wife is allowed to be her own person - he does not own her and she is not bound to the SCOTUS ethics.

Believe it or not, woman can have their own opinions.

Hahahaha. This former general’s wife thinks this is hysterically naive. The fun thing about being married to guys like this is that at we don’t get all the ethics training they get but we can 100% make mistakes that end their careers.

Military wives (not being sexist here- I'm a female vet but being realistic, generals are overwhelmingly male) are completely different from spouses of senior government officials. Most government agencies have no-- none-- null training for spouses. The nature of the work is such that a spouse may never have any contact with the agency or any representatives of the agency aside from the spouse. Moreover, it's common that the non-governmental spouse is the one making (often much) more money. It's one thing to ask a SAHM Military spouse to get on board. It's a completely different thing to tell a spouse making 10x the salary of the government official that they can't express political opinions. Especially when there are no actual legal requirements for them to censor themselves.

My wife is a high level non-political official. We have to fill out an intrusive financial disclosure every year that lists my assets along with hers. Also I cannot contribute to most political campaigns because of her position.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"I had no involvement whatsoever in the flying of the flag," Alito told the Times in an emailed statement. "It was briefly placed by Mrs. Alito in response to a neighbor’s use of objectionable and personally insulting language on yard signs."

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/supreme-court-justice-alitos-home-flew-us-flag-upside-down-following-jan-6-nyt/ar-BB1mwSIQ?ocid=BingNewsSerp

His wife probably hung it that way accidentally. Why is this even a story in 2024??

Wait.......a Supreme Court justices wife doesn't know which way the U.S Flag flies? that's the excuse? Please tell me you aren't alling for this? Please don't diminish our countries flag with disrespect. Have a little for our symbol of freedom. Please.

This just gets better and better - a liberal insisting that we treat our country's flag with respect. Meanwhile, not a peep from you when other liberals burn our country's flag. The hypocrisy is so blinding it's painful.

Is it? This man is essentially a demi-god, basically beyond the law and able to change every American’s life with his decisions and he doesn’t have the maturity to just grow up? He needs to try to punch down on a neighbor - who would probably prefer that this fascist sack of crap and his equal idiotic wife not live in their neighborhood - and in doing so signals that he does not believe in the American Experiment?

Grow up, Republicans. You are all terrible people. Literally, you support fascism and authoritarianism and all of you just seem stupid. You can’t grasp simple concepts, let alone bigger ones. But you’re sure you’re the victims, always, but duck your feelings.

Blah blah.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:End of day: Alito isn’t going to recuse himself because of the actions of his spouse. Much ado about nothing.

Wait but Hunter Biden....

Hunter is also much ado about nothing.

[Anonymous]

Let's just say what this is: It's really not *nothing* that one of the nine most powerful people in the country apparently thinks the constitution doesn't matter when it comes to elections. And that he's comfortable displaying the symbol of that believe right there for everyone to see.

[Anonymous]

This isn't about flying a flag upside down. This is about a Supreme Court Justice supporting a coup on 1/6 and thereafter. And his legal writing and votes support that assertion.

[Anonymous]

If there were credible reports this morning of a Supreme Court justice putting up a “F**k Donald Trump” flag on their lawn, the House Judiciary Committee would push to impeach before lunch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has a right to free speech because, get this, Supreme Court justices are US citizens.

It’s his private property.

Thank you very much. In the omnibus corrupt Supreme Court thread I said this is what your side would try as an excuse.

Really? Defending free speech now is an excuse?

Anyways, here is link to the hatch act.

Please read it. Alito did nothing wrong.

https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx

So you're suggesting that they needed to add a bullet to cover federal employees supporting an insurrection? I'm not sure they had that much foresight that this was needed when pulling this legislation together.

Both he and his wife are allowed free speech. They did this on their own property. His wife is allowed to be her own person - he does not own her and she is not bound to the SCOTUS ethics.

Believe it or not, woman can have their own opinions.

Hahahaha. This former general’s wife thinks this is hysterically naive. The fun thing about being married to guys like this is that at we don’t get all the ethics training they get but we can 100% make mistakes that end their careers.

Military wives (not being sexist here- I'm a female vet but being realistic, generals are overwhelmingly male) are completely different from spouses of senior government officials. Most government agencies have no-- none-- null training for spouses. The nature of the work is such that a spouse may never have any contact with the agency or any representatives of the agency aside from the spouse. Moreover, it's common that the non-governmental spouse is the one making (often much) more money. It's one thing to ask a SAHM Military spouse to get on board. It's a completely different thing to tell a spouse making 10x the salary of the government official that they can't express political opinions. Especially when there are no actual legal requirements for them to censor themselves.

What a load of crap. No, it’s not about the non-government spouse’s job and how much you can bully her into giving up her independence for the government employee's role. It’s about ethics and professionalism. In fact there was a lawsuit about this years ago. Just because military spouses move all the time and it’s hard to have a career, idoesn’t mean the military gets to make them free employees.

You have no idea what you’re talking about and your ignorance is astonishing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has a right to free speech because, get this, Supreme Court justices are US citizens.

It’s his private property.

Thank you very much. In the omnibus corrupt Supreme Court thread I said this is what your side would try as an excuse.

Really? Defending free speech now is an excuse?

Anyways, here is link to the hatch act.

Please read it. Alito did nothing wrong.

https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx

So you're suggesting that they needed to add a bullet to cover federal employees supporting an insurrection? I'm not sure they had that much foresight that this was needed when pulling this legislation together.

Both he and his wife are allowed free speech. They did this on their own property. His wife is allowed to be her own person - he does not own her and she is not bound to the SCOTUS ethics.

Believe it or not, woman can have their own opinions.

Hahahaha. This former general’s wife thinks this is hysterically naive. The fun thing about being married to guys like this is that at we don’t get all the ethics training they get but we can 100% make mistakes that end their careers.

Military wives (not being sexist here- I'm a female vet but being realistic, generals are overwhelmingly male) are completely different from spouses of senior government officials. Most government agencies have no-- none-- null training for spouses. The nature of the work is such that a spouse may never have any contact with the agency or any representatives of the agency aside from the spouse. Moreover, it's common that the non-governmental spouse is the one making (often much) more money. It's one thing to ask a SAHM Military spouse to get on board. It's a completely different thing to tell a spouse making 10x the salary of the government official that they can't express political opinions. Especially when there are no actual legal requirements for them to censor themselves.

My wife is a high level non-political official. We have to fill out an intrusive financial disclosure every year that lists my assets along with hers. Also I cannot contribute to most political campaigns because of her position.

I'm a spouse of a federal employee and all of our combined assets are looked over every year by the ethics department of the fed agency, and the stocks and even mutual funds we can own are evaluated every single year. And what we are prohibited from owning changes with dh's federal position. Same thing for his coworkers.

But apparently if you are on the Supreme Court or Congress, anything goes.

[Anonymous]

He was part of the plot

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He has a right to free speech because, get this, Supreme Court justices are US citizens.

It’s his private property.

Thank you very much. In the omnibus corrupt Supreme Court thread I said this is what your side would try as an excuse.

Really? Defending free speech now is an excuse?

Anyways, here is link to the hatch act.

Please read it. Alito did nothing wrong.

https://osc.gov/Services/Pages/HatchAct-Federal.aspx

So you're suggesting that they needed to add a bullet to cover federal employees supporting an insurrection? I'm not sure they had that much foresight that this was needed when pulling this legislation together.

Both he and his wife are allowed free speech. They did this on their own property. His wife is allowed to be her own person - he does not own her and she is not bound to the SCOTUS ethics.

Believe it or not, woman can have their own opinions.

Hahahaha. This former general’s wife thinks this is hysterically naive. The fun thing about being married to guys like this is that at we don’t get all the ethics training they get but we can 100% make mistakes that end their careers.

Military wives (not being sexist here- I'm a female vet but being realistic, generals are overwhelmingly male) are completely different from spouses of senior government officials. Most government agencies have no-- none-- null training for spouses. The nature of the work is such that a spouse may never have any contact with the agency or any representatives of the agency aside from the spouse. Moreover, it's common that the non-governmental spouse is the one making (often much) more money. It's one thing to ask a SAHM Military spouse to get on board. It's a completely different thing to tell a spouse making 10x the salary of the government official that they can't express political opinions. Especially when there are no actual legal requirements for them to censor themselves.

My wife is a high level non-political official. We have to fill out an intrusive financial disclosure every year that lists my assets along with hers. Also I cannot contribute to most political campaigns because of her position.

I'm a spouse of a federal employee and all of our combined assets are looked over every year by the ethics department of the fed agency, and the stocks and even mutual funds we can own are evaluated every single year. And what we are prohibited from owning changes with dh's federal position. Same thing for his coworkers.

But apparently if you are on the Supreme Court or Congress, anything goes.

Seriously why should you be held to a higher standard or a law that is not applied to anyone else?