Rogue Anti-Trump Judge Hit With Articles Of Impeachment

[Fuzzy1975]

Let me be clear. After watching what your little dictator Soy Boy did to the citizens of Canada during the Covid shit there NO FUCKING WAY some shit for brains Canadian opinion writer has ANYTHING of value to say to the US about democracy....................NOTHING. Fuck off.

Funny you've not come to this thread to spread your wisdom propaganda.....

https://forum.literotica.com/thread...o-hours-for-ukraine-phone-conference.1630271/

Whys that?

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1902129839185842370

Full text

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1901828312869347636

 

[jomar]

lol, rule of law. Invoking the alien enemies act is an end run around rule of law. trump gives zero fucks about rule of law unless he can use it for his own benefit.

 

[HisArpy]

Roberts is right.

Yes.

But he should have kept his mouth shut.

 

[HumpDayHoratio]

lol, rule of law. Invoking the alien enemies act is an end run around rule of law. trump gives zero fucks about rule of law unless he can use it for his own benefit.

Must be a presidential thing…I’m guessing you’ll not agree w CATO

I guess it’s a matter of whose ox is getting gored eh Jo?

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Must be a presidential thing…I’m guessing you’ll not agree w CATO

I guess it’s a matter of whose ox is getting gored eh Jo?

What's your point? If one president broke the law, another gets to break it more?

 

[HisArpy]

What's your point? If one president broke the law, another gets to break it more?

I think it's more a matter of STFU with your whining merely because you don't support the current President.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Yes.

But he should have kept his mouth shut.

People can have opinions about whether he should or shouldn’t have said it, but judges have 1st amendment rights just like the rest of us. I agree with his comment but don’t see it as a big deal.

 

[HisArpy]

People can have opinions about whether he should or shouldn’t have said it, but judges have 1st amendment rights just like the rest of us. I agree with his comment but don’t see it as a big deal.

There's an ethics rule involved. SCOTUS justices should refrain from public comment on political issues or matters which may come before them.

This is the claim they ALL make during their confirmation hearings. Roberts should have kept his DAMNED mouth shut because it completely destroys anyone in future confirmation hearings from making the claim of neutrality.

 

[Cheshire_cat71]

There's an ethics rule involved. SCOTUS justices should refrain from public comment on political issues or matters which may come before them.

This is the claim they ALL make during their confirmation hearings. Roberts should have kept his DAMNED mouth shut because it completely destroys anyone in future confirmation hearings from making the claim of neutrality.

But SCOTUS doesn’t have a formal rule of ethics. This has been a taking point because of the shady crap they are up to. Clarence Thomas being the worst of them. Who said it is not the point. The point is some finally did and the man that occupies the Oval Office is not going after one member of SCOTUS without the rest of them acting like brothers and sisters to protect each other. The bottom line is that the Orange Cheeto thinks he is above the law and wants to be a dictator. If you don’t see that, then your head is in the sand

 

[HisArpy]

But SCOTUS doesn’t have a formal rule of ethics.

Not true. Because of the recent social outcry, SCOTUS created ethic rules and now requires all of the justices to adhere to them.

Roberts just violated those rules. Oopsie.

 

[jomar]

Must be a presidential thing…I’m guessing you’ll not agree w CATO

I guess it’s a matter of whose ox is getting gored eh Jo?

To some extent, yes. I imagine no presidents hand are squeaky clean. But I’m confident in saying that history will reveal a huge difference between trump an Obama in this arena.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

I think it's more a matter of STFU with your whining merely because you don't support the current President.

I'm not the one who bought up the IKYABWAI defence. I'm also not the one defending the use of the IKYABWAI defence, now am I?

You're a real shitty lawyer btw. Fuck the opposing council must argue over which one is taking on any case your the attorney.....free win!

 

[Rightguide]

Roberts can have his opinion! It's only an opinion! No federal judge has the authority over the executive branch. None of them! If they did, why have a president? End of story! Buckle up Beuttercup, the fun hasent even started yet!!

The Chief Justice or any other Judge has no business commenting on a political matter such as the impeachment process which is wholly a function of the Congress, not the judiciary.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

The Chief Justice or any other Judge has no business commenting on a political matter such as the impeachment process which is wholly a function of the Congress, not the judiciary.

Well Roberts has twice slapped down Trump, he's on the SCOTUS, so I guess he disagree's with you.

 

[Rightguide]

Not true. Because of the recent social outcry, SCOTUS created ethic rules and now requires all of the justices to adhere to them.

Roberts just violated those rules. Oopsie.

The other two branches of government have methodologies for disciplining their officers and employees. The judiciary should also have such a disciplinary enforcement arm to punish breaches of conduct that might not reach the threshold of high crimes and misdemeanors.

 

[ll74]

The Chief Justice or any other Judge has no business commenting on a political matter such as the impeachment process which is wholly a function of the Congress, not the judiciary.

Of course he does. It's specifically regarding political comments made about the judiciary branch.

 

[Rightguide]

Of course he does. It's specifically regarding political comments made about the judiciary branch.

No he doesn't. He should be shutting these rogue judges down for stepping out of their lane of authority.

 

[ll74]

No he doesn't. He should be shutting these rogue judges down for stepping out of their lane of authority.

There are no rogue judges. If they don't like the judges orders, they can appeal. Roberts just reiterated that.

47 is the one out of line here.

 

[Rightguide]

And the executive branch doesn’t have authority over the Judiciary. I am Tired of people that complain when someone disagrees with the Cheeto. I mean If he wants to ignore a lawful order by a court that is well within the purview of the court then I guess Those executive orders are as good as as the toilet paper I use To wipe myself. Those aren’t law anyway. I cannot Wait for y’all to be crying when all of your civil liberties are taking away thinking it was not going to affect you. Viva la revoluscion!!!!

Judges have no authority over the President when he is exercising his Article II powers. When the President is acting at the apex of his authority the authority of the Judicial branch is at its nadir.

 

[DeluxAuto]

What's a back account? And how do you freeze it?

I use Icy Hot Max.

 

[HisArpy]

An epiphany has occurred to me.

CONGRESS needs to stop pussy footing around with the BS and put a Bill on the floor removing jurisdiction for Federal suits from the Federal judiciary and transferring it exclusively to SCOTUS. In essence, if you want to sue the administrative branch of the gov, you have to file directly with SCOTUS unless there's another court which has subject matter jurisdiction. (ie; court of federal claims for contract issues.) Put in the Bill that current claims against the US administrative branch cannot be transferred to the SCOTUS, they must be dismissed and any judicial orders dissolved and the parties must refile original claims with the High Court.

Get that bill past each house without modification or amendments and have it on Trump's desk by next Friday for his signature.

END of rogue judges.

Best part is that SCOTUS won't hear the cases.

 

[Rightguide]

An epiphany has occurred to me.

CONGRESS needs to stop pussy footing around with the BS and put a Bill on the floor removing jurisdiction for Federal suits from the Federal judiciary and transferring it exclusively to SCOTUS. In essence, if you want to sue the administrative branch of the gov, you have to file directly with SCOTUS unless there's another court which has subject matter jurisdiction. (ie; court of federal claims for contract issues.) Put in the Bill that current claims against the US administrative branch cannot be transferred to the SCOTUS, they must be dismissed and any judicial orders dissolved and the parties must refile original claims with the High Court.

Get that bill past each house without modification or amendments and have it on Trump's desk by next Friday for his signature.

END of rogue judges.

Best part is that SCOTUS won't hear the cases.

If not that the Appellate Level. There is no way the President who is equal to the SCOTUS and the Congress should have to take direction from an inferior federal court judge.

PS: How many on the left went nuts when Joe Biden defied the SCOTUS on student loans? How many will shit their pants if Trump does it?

 

[HisArpy]

If not that the Appellate Level. There is no way the President who is equal to the SCOTUS and the Congress should have to take direction from an inferior federal court judge.

PS: How many on the left went nuts when Joe Biden defied the SCOTUS on student loans? How many will shit their pants if Trump does it?

I think the appeals courts are also filled with rogue justices. Following the precepts of the Constitution and amending the Judiciary Act of 1789 would go a long way toward getting rid of meritless political claims and equally meritless judicial orders.