Anonymous wrote:I commend Alito for taking the opportunity to teach the liberals who think history started when they were born a little about the history of this country.

The idea that he would fly a flag designed and used during the American Revolution helps our youth learn what they failed to learn in school.

In a letter dated October 20, 1775,[1][2] General Washington's secretary, Colonel Joseph Reed, suggested a "flag with a white ground and a tree in the middle, the motto AN APPEAL TO HEAVEN" be used for the ships Washington commissioned.[5] Two heavily armed American scows, or "floating batteries," launched on the Charles River in September 1775 had used the Pine Tree flag as an ensign; in his letter, Reed described the banner he proposed as "the flag of our floating batteries."[2][1] The six schooners commissioned by Congress beginning in October 1775 to intercept British ships entering Boston—the USS Hancock, Lee, Franklin, Harrison, Lynch, and Warren—used the Pine Tree flag.[2][1]
The following year, on April 29, 1776,[2][1] the Massachusetts Council established the flag of the state navy with a resolution stating: "...that the Colours be a white Flag, with a green Pine Tree, and the Inscription, 'An Appeal to Heaven'."[1][5][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Tree_Flag

Anonymous wrote:I commend Alito for taking the opportunity to teach the liberals who think history started when they were born a little about the history of this country.

The idea that he would fly a flag designed and used during the American Revolution helps our youth learn what they failed to learn in school.

In a letter dated October 20, 1775,[1][2] General Washington's secretary, Colonel Joseph Reed, suggested a "flag with a white ground and a tree in the middle, the motto AN APPEAL TO HEAVEN" be used for the ships Washington commissioned.[5] Two heavily armed American scows, or "floating batteries," launched on the Charles River in September 1775 had used the Pine Tree flag as an ensign; in his letter, Reed described the banner he proposed as "the flag of our floating batteries."[2][1] The six schooners commissioned by Congress beginning in October 1775 to intercept British ships entering Boston—the USS Hancock, Lee, Franklin, Harrison, Lynch, and Warren—used the Pine Tree flag.[2][1]
The following year, on April 29, 1776,[2][1] the Massachusetts Council established the flag of the state navy with a resolution stating: "...that the Colours be a white Flag, with a green Pine Tree, and the Inscription, 'An Appeal to Heaven'."[1][5][2]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pine_Tree_Flag

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Was the Pine Tree flag bad when BLM displayed it, or nah?

Yes

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s very frustrating to try to have a thoughtful discussion with someone whose responses are ad hominem attacks with no substance. You don’t know me or where I get my news from. Feel free to respond to my points or just move along.

Here’s the main point: Alito sides with the traitors to our country and has shown that he lacks judicial temperament, although we’ve know that for years as we saw from his face pulling during Obama’s SOTU.

Here’s the main point: he is SCOTUS for life and isn’t going anywhere even if his wife takes actions you don’t agree with.

Anonymous wrote:Was the Pine Tree flag bad when BLM displayed it, or nah?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s very frustrating to try to have a thoughtful discussion with someone whose responses are ad hominem attacks with no substance. You don’t know me or where I get my news from. Feel free to respond to my points or just move along.

Here’s the main point: Alito sides with the traitors to our country and has shown that he lacks judicial temperament, although we’ve know that for years as we saw from his face pulling during Obama’s SOTU.

Anonymous wrote:Was the Pine Tree flag bad when BLM displayed it, or nah?

Anonymous wrote:Was the Pine Tree flag bad when BLM displayed it, or nah?

Anonymous wrote:It’s very frustrating to try to have a thoughtful discussion with someone whose responses are ad hominem attacks with no substance. You don’t know me or where I get my news from. Feel free to respond to my points or just move along.

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.

He is a US Supreme Court Judge.
He is supposed to be impartial.
He is not supposed to flout the rules and display partisan symbols, particularly when he is ruling on cases related to that very issue he has so clearly demonstrated he is not impartial at all, but has a very clear bias in favor of the insurrectionists.

If he wants to express his political views in public, he should step down from the SCOTUS. Until then, he needs to keep his views private, or recuse himself from cases where he has no business claiming impartiality. By flying flags supporting the January 6 uprising, Judge Alito demonstrates in full view of the public that he is not impartial, and therefore cannot be on the SCOTUS.

Justices do not lose their First Amendment rights just because they sit on the Supreme Court. Also, you're making a significant assumption about the meaning of the flags and the intent in their display. Where is your objective evidence that Justice Alito or his wife support an overthrow of the U.S. Government?

You guys never understand the first amendment or anything about federal employees. Truly, if you’re not a Russian troll, you must be writing from the middle of nowhere and have never left your town or interacted with anyone outside your family.

This. You have to wonder if these people ever leave their homes. Do they just spend their days going down weird rabbit holes? They are not tethered to reality.

They don't lose their First Amendment rights. They are constrained by ethics rules.

If the standard being applied to Justice Alito (and it's his wife, not him) is the correct one, why hasn't Judge Chutkin in the D.C. case recused herself? Or perhaps Alvin Bragg and Letitia James in New York? Those seem to be far more obvious situations than the one being levied against Justice Alito.

Pp here. I was referring to posters like you. You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re just grabbing random names of judges and prosecutors who serve in completely different capacities and are stringing them together because you perceive they are being “unfair” to Trump. Please please please think!

DP
Both Leticia James and Alvin Bragg ran on “getting Trump.” Neither of them ran on going after any specific crime - just going after a person. And considering that Bragg has reduced more than half of the felony violations to misdemeanors in NYC but has bent over backwards to increase a misdemeanor violation to a felony in Trump”s case shows that these are solely political prosecutions.

Do you have any sort of link to something that would support this? Because I think you are full of crap.

FOR PROSECUTOR BRAGG, TRUMP INDICTMENT IS CAMPAIGN PROMISE KEPT. Alvin Bragg, the local district attorney in Manhattan who has led the effort to indict former President Donald Trump, is an elected official. He ran for his current office in 2021. In that campaign, he won a Democratic primary crowded with fellow Democrats who promised that, if elected, they would go after Trump. Now, having been elected, Bragg is going after Trump.

Getting Trump has been a common feature in New York elections for law enforcement positions. The 2018 campaign for state attorney general was a virtual bidding war in which each candidate promised to pursue Trump more zealously than the other candidates. The winner, Attorney General Letitia James, has been unable to come up with criminal charges against Trump personally, but she did, along with Bragg, prosecute the Trump Organization on questionable grounds — or, if not questionable, at least grounds that led observers to wonder whether the case would have been pursued with such fervor against an organization not named Trump. Top Trump official Allen Weisselberg pleaded guilty to 15 felony charges.

Now Bragg has won the indict-Trump sweepstakes. And for him, indicting Trump on charges that seem truly questionable is more than just indicting Trump. It is keeping a campaign promise. No, Bragg did not specifically pledge, “If elected, I will indict Donald J. Trump.” But he promised to pursue Trump and hold him “accountable,” which is liberal code for going after Trump in any way possible.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

He is a US Supreme Court Judge.
He is supposed to be impartial.
He is not supposed to flout the rules and display partisan symbols, particularly when he is ruling on cases related to that very issue he has so clearly demonstrated he is not impartial at all, but has a very clear bias in favor of the insurrectionists.

If he wants to express his political views in public, he should step down from the SCOTUS. Until then, he needs to keep his views private, or recuse himself from cases where he has no business claiming impartiality. By flying flags supporting the January 6 uprising, Judge Alito demonstrates in full view of the public that he is not impartial, and therefore cannot be on the SCOTUS.

Justices do not lose their First Amendment rights just because they sit on the Supreme Court. Also, you're making a significant assumption about the meaning of the flags and the intent in their display. Where is your objective evidence that Justice Alito or his wife support an overthrow of the U.S. Government?

You guys never understand the first amendment or anything about federal employees. Truly, if you’re not a Russian troll, you must be writing from the middle of nowhere and have never left your town or interacted with anyone outside your family.

This. You have to wonder if these people ever leave their homes. Do they just spend their days going down weird rabbit holes? They are not tethered to reality.

They don't lose their First Amendment rights. They are constrained by ethics rules.

If the standard being applied to Justice Alito (and it's his wife, not him) is the correct one, why hasn't Judge Chutkin in the D.C. case recused herself? Or perhaps Alvin Bragg and Letitia James in New York? Those seem to be far more obvious situations than the one being levied against Justice Alito.

Pp here. I was referring to posters like you. You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re just grabbing random names of judges and prosecutors who serve in completely different capacities and are stringing them together because you perceive they are being “unfair” to Trump. Please please please think!

DP
Both Leticia James and Alvin Bragg ran on “getting Trump.” Neither of them ran on going after any specific crime - just going after a person. And considering that Bragg has reduced more than half of the felony violations to misdemeanors in NYC but has bent over backwards to increase a misdemeanor violation to a felony in Trump”s case shows that these are solely political prosecutions.

Bragg and James are state employees, not federal. They are accountable to the people of NY, not the US. Aren't you one of those people who espouse state rights.

Judges in New York, by New York Law, are not permitted to donate to any political party. Trumps trail judge not only donated to Biden but to an anti-trump PAC. He just happened to be in the rotation to take this case. Gimme a break. It's disgusting.

Stop. Just admit that you think Trump is innocent of all charges and stop maligning those involved. (You’re wrong Trump is shady AF.)

Being "shady" isn't a crime. You need to admit that the NYC case isn't a very strong one, and based on the polls, likely won't make much of a difference at this point.

MAGA is a cult. All the cases against Trump won’t change their minds at all. They’ve chugged the Kool-aid and will follow Trump over the cliff. It irrelevant to MAGA.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

He is a US Supreme Court Judge.
He is supposed to be impartial.
He is not supposed to flout the rules and display partisan symbols, particularly when he is ruling on cases related to that very issue he has so clearly demonstrated he is not impartial at all, but has a very clear bias in favor of the insurrectionists.

If he wants to express his political views in public, he should step down from the SCOTUS. Until then, he needs to keep his views private, or recuse himself from cases where he has no business claiming impartiality. By flying flags supporting the January 6 uprising, Judge Alito demonstrates in full view of the public that he is not impartial, and therefore cannot be on the SCOTUS.

Justices do not lose their First Amendment rights just because they sit on the Supreme Court. Also, you're making a significant assumption about the meaning of the flags and the intent in their display. Where is your objective evidence that Justice Alito or his wife support an overthrow of the U.S. Government?

You guys never understand the first amendment or anything about federal employees. Truly, if you’re not a Russian troll, you must be writing from the middle of nowhere and have never left your town or interacted with anyone outside your family.

This. You have to wonder if these people ever leave their homes. Do they just spend their days going down weird rabbit holes? They are not tethered to reality.

They don't lose their First Amendment rights. They are constrained by ethics rules.

If the standard being applied to Justice Alito (and it's his wife, not him) is the correct one, why hasn't Judge Chutkin in the D.C. case recused herself? Or perhaps Alvin Bragg and Letitia James in New York? Those seem to be far more obvious situations than the one being levied against Justice Alito.

Pp here. I was referring to posters like you. You clearly have no idea what you’re talking about. You’re just grabbing random names of judges and prosecutors who serve in completely different capacities and are stringing them together because you perceive they are being “unfair” to Trump. Please please please think!

DP
Both Leticia James and Alvin Bragg ran on “getting Trump.” Neither of them ran on going after any specific crime - just going after a person. And considering that Bragg has reduced more than half of the felony violations to misdemeanors in NYC but has bent over backwards to increase a misdemeanor violation to a felony in Trump”s case shows that these are solely political prosecutions.

Bragg and James are state employees, not federal. They are accountable to the people of NY, not the US. Aren't you one of those people who espouse state rights.

Judges in New York, by New York Law, are not permitted to donate to any political party. Trumps trail judge not only donated to Biden but to an anti-trump PAC. He just happened to be in the rotation to take this case. Gimme a break. It's disgusting.

Stop. Just admit that you think Trump is innocent of all charges and stop maligning those involved. (You’re wrong Trump is shady AF.)

Being "shady" isn't a crime. You need to admit that the NYC case isn't a very strong one, and based on the polls, likely won't make much of a difference at this point.