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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this garbage posting by MAGAs reminding me that the average IQ is 100. You can’t make them smarter, you just have to vote on higher numbers.

Until right wing media fried their brains, they appealed to their higher angels though. I would have disagreed with much of 1960s Republicans, but I think overall they were decent people who loved their country.

Now Republicans are idiots sure they’re the smartest voices in the room and they defend the lowest of the low. Look at the guy above who is happy to play dumb as to why the lawmakers are waving Ukrainian flags. Or maybe he is that dumb, but I think he’s just playing dumb. There’s a person with morals in there somewhere, but he’s got the blocks up to make sure that he doesn’t actually think about what it means for a justice to be obviously partial and arrogant about it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Supreme Court justice flying the "Appeal to Heaven" flag at his home.
The left is trying really hard to make it controversial. It is not.

You know what I have noticed about liberals, in general compared to Republicans?

Republicans tend to attack policies and criticize lawmakers. Yes, and sometimes mock them.
Liberals attack the voters. Hillary did it. Kathy Hochul has done it. Biden does it routinely. And, it is rampant on this board.

How about a Supreme Court justice flying a Black Lives Matter flag, is that okay with you? Because either Black lives matter or they don't, so it's a simple statement, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this garbage posting by MAGAs reminding me that the average IQ is 100. You can’t make them smarter, you just have to vote on higher numbers.

Until right wing media fried their brains, they appealed to their higher angels though. I would have disagreed with much of 1960s Republicans, but I think overall they were decent people who loved their country.

Now Republicans are idiots sure they’re the smartest voices in the room and they defend the lowest of the low. Look at the guy above who is happy to play dumb as to why the lawmakers are waving Ukrainian flags. Or maybe he is that dumb, but I think he’s just playing dumb. There’s a person with morals in there somewhere, but he’s got the blocks up to make sure that he doesn’t actually think about what it means for a justice to be obviously partial and arrogant about it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Supreme Court justice flying the "Appeal to Heaven" flag at his home.
The left is trying really hard to make it controversial. It is not.

You know what I have noticed about liberals, in general compared to Republicans?

Republicans tend to attack policies and criticize lawmakers. Yes, and sometimes mock them.
Liberals attack the voters. Hillary did it. Kathy Hochul has done it. Biden does it routinely. And, it is rampant on this board.

How about a Supreme Court justice flying a Black Lives Matter flag, is that okay with you? Because either Black lives matter or they don't, so it's a simple statement, right?

It’s not simple. And it would not be ok either. Because although the message is reasonable, (stop beating and killing black people) it was part of a partisan fight.

That will make their brain burst. They’d have to comprehend that SJC are supposed to be apolitical. They don’t.

No, they should not have any kind of public display of bias. They should not have bias at all. It takes deliberate and intentional professionalism to be committed to apolitical service. Like Keegan who wouldn’t accept a gift of bagels. Beyond reproach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this garbage posting by MAGAs reminding me that the average IQ is 100. You can’t make them smarter, you just have to vote on higher numbers.

Until right wing media fried their brains, they appealed to their higher angels though. I would have disagreed with much of 1960s Republicans, but I think overall they were decent people who loved their country.

Now Republicans are idiots sure they’re the smartest voices in the room and they defend the lowest of the low. Look at the guy above who is happy to play dumb as to why the lawmakers are waving Ukrainian flags. Or maybe he is that dumb, but I think he’s just playing dumb. There’s a person with morals in there somewhere, but he’s got the blocks up to make sure that he doesn’t actually think about what it means for a justice to be obviously partial and arrogant about it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Supreme Court justice flying the "Appeal to Heaven" flag at his home.
The left is trying really hard to make it controversial. It is not.

You know what I have noticed about liberals, in general compared to Republicans?

Republicans tend to attack policies and criticize lawmakers. Yes, and sometimes mock them.
Liberals attack the voters. Hillary did it. Kathy Hochul has done it. Biden does it routinely. And, it is rampant on this board.

How about a Supreme Court justice flying a Black Lives Matter flag, is that okay with you? Because either Black lives matter or they don't, so it's a simple statement, right?

It’s not simple. And it would not be ok either. Because although the message is reasonable, (stop beating and killing black people) it was part of a partisan fight.

That will make their brain burst. They’d have to comprehend that SJC are supposed to be apolitical. They don’t.

No, they should not have any kind of public display of bias. They should not have bias at all. It takes deliberate and intentional professionalism to be committed to apolitical service. Like Keegan who wouldn’t accept a gift of bagels. Beyond reproach.

Totally agree with you. It's so flagrant, the willful blindness to how wildly inappropriate it is for a SC justice to fly a partisan flag.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All this garbage posting by MAGAs reminding me that the average IQ is 100. You can’t make them smarter, you just have to vote on higher numbers.

Until right wing media fried their brains, they appealed to their higher angels though. I would have disagreed with much of 1960s Republicans, but I think overall they were decent people who loved their country.

Now Republicans are idiots sure they’re the smartest voices in the room and they defend the lowest of the low. Look at the guy above who is happy to play dumb as to why the lawmakers are waving Ukrainian flags. Or maybe he is that dumb, but I think he’s just playing dumb. There’s a person with morals in there somewhere, but he’s got the blocks up to make sure that he doesn’t actually think about what it means for a justice to be obviously partial and arrogant about it.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with a Supreme Court justice flying the "Appeal to Heaven" flag at his home.
The left is trying really hard to make it controversial. It is not.

You know what I have noticed about liberals, in general compared to Republicans?

Republicans tend to attack policies and criticize lawmakers. Yes, and sometimes mock them.
Liberals attack the voters. Hillary did it. Kathy Hochul has done it. Biden does it routinely. And, it is rampant on this board.

How about a Supreme Court justice flying a Black Lives Matter flag, is that okay with you? Because either Black lives matter or they don't, so it's a simple statement, right?

It’s not simple. And it would not be ok either. Because although the message is reasonable, (stop beating and killing black people) it was part of a partisan fight.

That will make their brain burst. They’d have to comprehend that SJC are supposed to be apolitical. They don’t.

No, they should not have any kind of public display of bias. They should not have bias at all. It takes deliberate and intentional professionalism to be committed to apolitical service. Like Keegan who wouldn’t accept a gift of bagels. Beyond reproach.

Totally agree with you. It's so flagrant, the willful blindness to how wildly inappropriate it is for a SC justice to fly a partisan flag.

+1

[Anonymous]

Beyond the trolls trying to gaslight about Alito’s appearance of partiality, has Roberts said anything? Roberts? Roberts??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Beyond the trolls trying to gaslight about Alito’s appearance of partiality, has Roberts said anything? Roberts? Roberts??

Alito and Roberts are the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does an upside down “An Appeal to Heaven” flag mean?

The upside down American flag is normally a sign of distress or emergency. At the time Alito flew it though, it was being used by insurrectionists as part their “stop the steal” nonsense.

The appeal to heaven flag isn’t upside down, it’s a flag of Christian nationalism.

Neither is appropriate outside a Supreme Court justice’s home.

Neither is Chuck Schumer threatening SCOTUS Justices.

Correct. That was also dumb. See how we can hold everyone to a higher standard? We don’t have to take sides.

Oh, was Chuck held to a standard? How?

This will shock you but I have no control over that. My standards, regardless of their consistency, don’t matter. But you know that. You’re playing games. And you’re trying to compare the dumb, sloppy use of a common empty phrase and a Supreme Court justice flying a flag of insurrection and that’s also dumb.

He's not only a Supreme Court Justice. He's also a citizen.

He can fly whatever the hell he wants to. I for one am happy he's exercising his first amendment rights.

And he's practicing Equal Protection Under the Law.

Don't like it, too bad.

Your ignorance is remarkable. Have you even taken a middle school civics class?

Even if they have, they function under the same umbrella as all Republicans: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

If a Republicans does it, “it” being literally anything including fraud, rape, pedophilia, treason, general ethical violations or anything else, it’s fine, no questions asked.

He displayed a flag, just like anyone and everyone else can.

Stow your righteous indignation.

If you understood anything about government jobs and the rules feds have to follow, you’d hate government a lot less.

Maybe you’re this stupid, but I think you’re pretending to be just to troll. Pathetic.

No, it's just super fun to tie you up in knots with your lack of brain power and logic.

If it was flipped 180 degrees, you'd be totally in favor of it.

Bottom line: you believe in a nation of men, not a nation of laws.

That's not what this country is about, but you (and the DNC) still don't grasp that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does an upside down “An Appeal to Heaven” flag mean?

The upside down American flag is normally a sign of distress or emergency. At the time Alito flew it though, it was being used by insurrectionists as part their “stop the steal” nonsense.

The appeal to heaven flag isn’t upside down, it’s a flag of Christian nationalism.

Neither is appropriate outside a Supreme Court justice’s home.

Neither is Chuck Schumer threatening SCOTUS Justices.

Correct. That was also dumb. See how we can hold everyone to a higher standard? We don’t have to take sides.

Oh, was Chuck held to a standard? How?

This will shock you but I have no control over that. My standards, regardless of their consistency, don’t matter. But you know that. You’re playing games. And you’re trying to compare the dumb, sloppy use of a common empty phrase and a Supreme Court justice flying a flag of insurrection and that’s also dumb.

He's not only a Supreme Court Justice. He's also a citizen.

He can fly whatever the hell he wants to. I for one am happy he's exercising his first amendment rights.

And he's practicing Equal Protection Under the Law.

Don't like it, too bad.

Your ignorance is remarkable. Have you even taken a middle school civics class?

Even if they have, they function under the same umbrella as all Republicans: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

If a Republicans does it, “it” being literally anything including fraud, rape, pedophilia, treason, general ethical violations or anything else, it’s fine, no questions asked.

He displayed a flag, just like anyone and everyone else can.

Stow your righteous indignation.

If you understood anything about government jobs and the rules feds have to follow, you’d hate government a lot less.

Maybe you’re this stupid, but I think you’re pretending to be just to troll. Pathetic.

No, it's just super fun to tie you up in knots with your lack of brain power and logic.

If it was flipped 180 degrees, you'd be totally in favor of it.

Bottom line: you believe in a nation of men, not a nation of laws.

That's not what this country is about, but you (and the DNC) still don't grasp that.

How is the DNC not supportive of a nation of laws?

Compare that with the GOP, which is all about corruption of our courts and supportive of a coup attempt

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does an upside down “An Appeal to Heaven” flag mean?

The upside down American flag is normally a sign of distress or emergency. At the time Alito flew it though, it was being used by insurrectionists as part their “stop the steal” nonsense.

The appeal to heaven flag isn’t upside down, it’s a flag of Christian nationalism.

Neither is appropriate outside a Supreme Court justice’s home.

Neither is Chuck Schumer threatening SCOTUS Justices.

Correct. That was also dumb. See how we can hold everyone to a higher standard? We don’t have to take sides.

Oh, was Chuck held to a standard? How?

This will shock you but I have no control over that. My standards, regardless of their consistency, don’t matter. But you know that. You’re playing games. And you’re trying to compare the dumb, sloppy use of a common empty phrase and a Supreme Court justice flying a flag of insurrection and that’s also dumb.

He's not only a Supreme Court Justice. He's also a citizen.

He can fly whatever the hell he wants to. I for one am happy he's exercising his first amendment rights.

And he's practicing Equal Protection Under the Law.

Don't like it, too bad.

Your ignorance is remarkable. Have you even taken a middle school civics class?

Even if they have, they function under the same umbrella as all Republicans: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

If a Republicans does it, “it” being literally anything including fraud, rape, pedophilia, treason, general ethical violations or anything else, it’s fine, no questions asked.

He displayed a flag, just like anyone and everyone else can.

Stow your righteous indignation.

If you understood anything about government jobs and the rules feds have to follow, you’d hate government a lot less.

Maybe you’re this stupid, but I think you’re pretending to be just to troll. Pathetic.

No, it's just super fun to tie you up in knots with your lack of brain power and logic.

If it was flipped 180 degrees, you'd be totally in favor of it.

Bottom line: you believe in a nation of men, not a nation of laws.

That's not what this country is about, but you (and the DNC) still don't grasp that.

You sound extremely juvenile.

And if what was flipped 180 degrees, what would PP be in favor of? If you are implying the left would be in favor if a more liberal-minded justice flew a partisan flag on their lawn, I am here to tell you as a leftist that no, I would not approve. It is not appropriate for judges to be vocal about their partisan leanings. They need to demonstrate they can be impartial. That is what the justice system is supposed to be about. If Alito has already made up his mind about J6 he should not be sitting in and ruling on a case about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What does an upside down “An Appeal to Heaven” flag mean?

The upside down American flag is normally a sign of distress or emergency. At the time Alito flew it though, it was being used by insurrectionists as part their “stop the steal” nonsense.

The appeal to heaven flag isn’t upside down, it’s a flag of Christian nationalism.

Neither is appropriate outside a Supreme Court justice’s home.

Neither is Chuck Schumer threatening SCOTUS Justices.

Correct. That was also dumb. See how we can hold everyone to a higher standard? We don’t have to take sides.

Oh, was Chuck held to a standard? How?

This will shock you but I have no control over that. My standards, regardless of their consistency, don’t matter. But you know that. You’re playing games. And you’re trying to compare the dumb, sloppy use of a common empty phrase and a Supreme Court justice flying a flag of insurrection and that’s also dumb.

He's not only a Supreme Court Justice. He's also a citizen.

He can fly whatever the hell he wants to. I for one am happy he's exercising his first amendment rights.

And he's practicing Equal Protection Under the Law.

Don't like it, too bad.

Your ignorance is remarkable. Have you even taken a middle school civics class?

Even if they have, they function under the same umbrella as all Republicans: “Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect.”

If a Republicans does it, “it” being literally anything including fraud, rape, pedophilia, treason, general ethical violations or anything else, it’s fine, no questions asked.

He displayed a flag, just like anyone and everyone else can.

Stow your righteous indignation.

If you understood anything about government jobs and the rules feds have to follow, you’d hate government a lot less.

Maybe you’re this stupid, but I think you’re pretending to be just to troll. Pathetic.

No, it's just super fun to tie you up in knots with your lack of brain power and logic.

If it was flipped 180 degrees, you'd be totally in favor of it.

Bottom line: you believe in a nation of men, not a nation of laws.

That's not what this country is about, but you (and the DNC) still don't grasp that.

What is this word salad? You’re being deliberately obtuse or responding to your imagination, not the posts here. This is beyond gaslighting and just nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Beyond the trolls trying to gaslight about Alito’s appearance of partiality, has Roberts said anything? Roberts? Roberts??

Alito threw his wife under the bus (but didn’t for the beach house Christian nationalist flag, which rather undercuts the premise that his wife was responsible for the one at their primary residence).

And the way this goes is: every time malfeasance of a right wing justice is revealed, they essentially say nothing. A few weeks to months later, they give a speech at a far right wing event or are interviewed by a sympathetic right winger journalist and they whine about how annoying Americans are for expecting better of them.

Frankly I think those ghouls are kept abreast of the commentary about them (Alito) and I would be Roberts probably comments on here occasionally. You think those middle fingers are so busy and professional? They’re obviously not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond the trolls trying to gaslight about Alito’s appearance of partiality, has Roberts said anything? Roberts? Roberts??

Alito threw his wife under the bus (but didn’t for the beach house Christian nationalist flag, which rather undercuts the premise that his wife was responsible for the one at their primary residence).

And the way this goes is: every time malfeasance of a right wing justice is revealed, they essentially say nothing. A few weeks to months later, they give a speech at a far right wing event or are interviewed by a sympathetic right winger journalist and they whine about how annoying Americans are for expecting better of them.

Frankly I think those ghouls are kept abreast of the commentary about them (Alito) and I would be Roberts probably comments on here occasionally. You think those middle fingers are so busy and professional? They’re obviously not.

Pp here. Interesting pattern you’ve shared. But it strikes me that the SCOTUS decision on Trump’s claim to complete immunity that is due out in the next few weeks would encourage Roberts to be more careful about the Court’s reputation, no? The Roberts Court already has a severe credibility problem.

[Anonymous]

I’m frankly glad that Alito is publicly flying these flags. For too long these republican judges have been doing the “we’re just calling balls and strikes routine” and many people buy it even though they keep calling balls when the pitch is straight down the middle when a Yankee happens to be batting. But now the umpire just took the field wearing pinstripes. No one can deny the umpire is playing for one of the teams any longer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond the trolls trying to gaslight about Alito’s appearance of partiality, has Roberts said anything? Roberts? Roberts??

Alito threw his wife under the bus (but didn’t for the beach house Christian nationalist flag, which rather undercuts the premise that his wife was responsible for the one at their primary residence).

And the way this goes is: every time malfeasance of a right wing justice is revealed, they essentially say nothing. A few weeks to months later, they give a speech at a far right wing event or are interviewed by a sympathetic right winger journalist and they whine about how annoying Americans are for expecting better of them.

Frankly I think those ghouls are kept abreast of the commentary about them (Alito) and I would be Roberts probably comments on here occasionally. You think those middle fingers are so busy and professional? They’re obviously not.

Pp here. Interesting pattern you’ve shared. But it strikes me that the SCOTUS decision on Trump’s claim to complete immunity that is due out in the next few weeks would encourage Roberts to be more careful about the Court’s reputation, no? The Roberts Court already has a severe credibility problem.

Why would Roberts care about the court’s reputation? It’s already in the toilet as a corrupted bench. They act with total impunity. Credibility doesn’t matter, just the veneer of lawfulness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Beyond the trolls trying to gaslight about Alito’s appearance of partiality, has Roberts said anything? Roberts? Roberts??

Alito threw his wife under the bus (but didn’t for the beach house Christian nationalist flag, which rather undercuts the premise that his wife was responsible for the one at their primary residence).

And the way this goes is: every time malfeasance of a right wing justice is revealed, they essentially say nothing. A few weeks to months later, they give a speech at a far right wing event or are interviewed by a sympathetic right winger journalist and they whine about how annoying Americans are for expecting better of them.

Frankly I think those ghouls are kept abreast of the commentary about them (Alito) and I would be Roberts probably comments on here occasionally. You think those middle fingers are so busy and professional? They’re obviously not.

Pp here. Interesting pattern you’ve shared. But it strikes me that the SCOTUS decision on Trump’s claim to complete immunity that is due out in the next few weeks would encourage Roberts to be more careful about the Court’s reputation, no? The Roberts Court already has a severe credibility problem.

Accurate.