Guess who just apologised

[ogibillm]

She proved she was biased when saying it and a liar by claiming she was sorry for doing so.

lol. biased? maybe you could claim bias if something about the election ended up in front of the court...

and nothing about expressing regret makes one a liar

Don't have to. By saying what she said, she already indicated where she stood. If you think, based on what she said, she would be anything but biased, you're an idiot. Would she be honorable enough to recuse herself since she has proven she wouldn't be able to be impartial?

It does when the only reason you do it isn't sincere.

Yep...if she has to rule on anything that involves politics in anyway she shouldnt be able to vote on it.
She just hamstrung herself and the court.

lol. that's a very broad brush. what makes you think none of the other justices dont hold opinions on the candidates?

I have no doubt other justices have opinions about he candidates. Difference is none of the others have said what Ginsburg said. If they do, my opinion would be the same.

so then you aren't actually concerned about bias

 

[Pogo]

Explain how stating her opinion is "performing the duties of judicial office".

Yeppers. You're a stupid one too. Judicial duties are always supposed to be based on impartial analysis, her declaration IS a demonstration of partiality. You really ARE a clown....

So...in your theory of law...a judge cannot express an option on anything without breaking the law....

Are you referring to the the lesbian option?

I was hoping you would be smart enough to see the weakness in your fail analogy....I was too optimistic...

Think about it.....

Weakness? Than why'd you fix the typo?
Good Lord you really are pathetic.

"Than" huh?

 

[ogibillm]

No it doesn't. Who forced her to apologize?

Her career and the ass chewing she was getting.

her career? she has a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. there is nobody above her to give her an ass chewing

everybody in our govt has someone who can give them an ass chewing......

so who supposedly gave it to a supreme court justice?

in her case Roberts.....he is not just the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court he is also the head of the United States federal court system....he is the chief administrative officer for the federal courts and as head of the Judicial Conference of the US im sure he can tell her plenty should he want to........

not really. he has no authority over her

 

[Pogo]

I disagree. Evil triumphs when good men (or women) do nothing.

She ain't a good woman. She's a liberal biased judge.

What'd she say about "liberalism" then?

She says it in every court decision. Start there.

Izzat right.

Link? Quote?

You do realize the question wasn't put to you, right?

I read your link, dumbfuck. You realize you posted your comment in an open forum, right?

Suit yourself, you coulda got off the hook.
So you still owe me quotes.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yeppers. You're a stupid one too. Judicial duties are always supposed to be based on impartial analysis, her declaration IS a demonstration of partiality. You really ARE a clown....

So...in your theory of law...a judge cannot express an option on anything without breaking the law....

Are you referring to the the lesbian option?

I was hoping you would be smart enough to see the weakness in your fail analogy....I was too optimistic...

Think about it.....

Weakness? Than why'd you fix the typo?
Good Lord you really are pathetic.

"Than" huh?

Thanks for the typo correction,I truly appreciate it.
See how easy that was?

 

[Auld Phart]

she proved she has an opinion on trump, nothing more

She proved she was biased when saying it and a liar by claiming she was sorry for doing so.

lol. biased? maybe you could claim bias if something about the election ended up in front of the court...

and nothing about expressing regret makes one a liar

Sandra Day O'Connor "regrets" Bush v. Gore too. Wonder if this crowd would paint her a "liar".

AFTER she left the bench.

Or did you think she was still on the bench, and Bush was president in 2013?

Doesn't matter --- the contrast there is between "apologize" and "regret".

Both Justices expressed a "regret" but in the present case you tried to make it into an "apology". So did the OP.
You even extended it to "liar".

Just using your own logic.

Sandra is no longer bound by the restrictions of her former position.

Ruth still is.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Ruth Bader Ginsburg - Bing

I am not doing this to help the douche nozzle OP'er but she did apologize which is the correct course of action...

Why? Are we not all entitled to an opinion?

Not saying it's right or wrong, but what she did was highly unorthodox for a SCOTUS justice. They are supposed to maintain a facade of impartiality.

 

[Pogo]

She proved she was biased when saying it and a liar by claiming she was sorry for doing so.

lol. biased? maybe you could claim bias if something about the election ended up in front of the court...

and nothing about expressing regret makes one a liar

Sandra Day O'Connor "regrets" Bush v. Gore too. Wonder if this crowd would paint her a "liar".

AFTER she left the bench.

Or did you think she was still on the bench, and Bush was president in 2013?

Doesn't matter --- the contrast there is between "apologize" and "regret".

Both Justices expressed a "regret" but in the present case you tried to make it into an "apology". So did the OP.
You even extended it to "liar".

Just using your own logic.

Sandra is no longer bound by the restrictions of her former position.

Ruth still is.

IRRELEVANT.

The distinction is between "regret" and "apologize". With a side of "liar".

Doesn't matter WHO'S doing it or in what context.

 

[Iceweasel]

She ain't a good woman. She's a liberal biased judge.

What'd she say about "liberalism" then?

She says it in every court decision. Start there.

Izzat right.

Link? Quote?

You do realize the question wasn't put to you, right?

I read your link, dumbfuck. You realize you posted your comment in an open forum, right?

Suit yourself, you coulda got off the hook.
So you still owe me quotes.

Nobody owes you anything if you are too lazy to read your own links and think this is where you have private conversations.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You duffuss liberals are getting eaten alive on this subject.
Maybe it's time to cut your losses?

 

[bodecea]

Explain how stating her opinion is "performing the duties of judicial office".

Yeppers. You're a stupid one too. Judicial duties are always supposed to be based on impartial analysis, her declaration IS a demonstration of partiality. You really ARE a clown....

So...in your theory of law...a judge cannot express an option on anything without breaking the law....

Are you referring to the the lesbian option?

I was hoping you would be smart enough to see the weakness in your fail analogy....I was too optimistic...

Think about it.....

We all know you meant opinion but go ahead and try and save face...or have your chick sit on you face....whatever.

On phone...spellchecker bad...fixed it...please don't pass out.

 

[bodecea]

Look at all of Scalia ' s publicly said opinions on things........but where are all the RW complaints?

You must have missed the link...
Funny how you do that every time it refutes your bullshit.

Excusing Scalia ' s comments...color me surprised....

 

[Auld Phart]

lol. biased? maybe you could claim bias if something about the election ended up in front of the court...

and nothing about expressing regret makes one a liar

Sandra Day O'Connor "regrets" Bush v. Gore too. Wonder if this crowd would paint her a "liar".

AFTER she left the bench.

Or did you think she was still on the bench, and Bush was president in 2013?

Doesn't matter --- the contrast there is between "apologize" and "regret".

Both Justices expressed a "regret" but in the present case you tried to make it into an "apology". So did the OP.
You even extended it to "liar".

Just using your own logic.

Sandra is no longer bound by the restrictions of her former position.

Ruth still is.

IRRELEVANT.

The distinction is between "regret" and "apologize". With a side of "liar".

Doesn't matter WHO'S doing it or in what context.

Doesn't matter WHO'S doing it or in what context.

I see you enjoy being wrong.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Yeppers. You're a stupid one too. Judicial duties are always supposed to be based on impartial analysis, her declaration IS a demonstration of partiality. You really ARE a clown....

So...in your theory of law...a judge cannot express an option on anything without breaking the law....

Are you referring to the the lesbian option?

I was hoping you would be smart enough to see the weakness in your fail analogy....I was too optimistic...

Think about it.....

We all know you meant opinion but go ahead and try and save face...or have your chick sit on you face....whatever.

On phone...spellchecker bad...fixed it...please don't pass out.

You use spell check?

 

[Pogo]

Ruth Bader Ginsburg - Bing

I am not doing this to help the douche nozzle OP'er but she did apologize which is the correct course of action...

Why? Are we not all entitled to an opinion?

Not saying it's right or wrong, but what she did was highly unorthodox for a SCOTUS justice. They are supposed to maintain a facade of impartiality.

Thank you --- façade is the key word.

Judges must be impartial within a case. Not in everything they do 24/7. And her comments had nothing to do with any case, nor can I think of a circumstance where they could be. Donald Rump's level of demagoguery just ain't likely to find a way to come before the Court. If it does, then she's disqualified. Ain't bloody likely, but ..... if.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Look at all of Scalia ' s publicly said opinions on things........but where are all the RW complaints?

You must have missed the link...
Funny how you do that every time it refutes your bullshit.

Excusing Scalia ' s comments...color me surprised....

You might want to go back and read the link.

 

[Pogo]

Sandra Day O'Connor "regrets" Bush v. Gore too. Wonder if this crowd would paint her a "liar".

AFTER she left the bench.

Or did you think she was still on the bench, and Bush was president in 2013?

Doesn't matter --- the contrast there is between "apologize" and "regret".

Both Justices expressed a "regret" but in the present case you tried to make it into an "apology". So did the OP.
You even extended it to "liar".

Just using your own logic.

Sandra is no longer bound by the restrictions of her former position.

Ruth still is.

IRRELEVANT.

The distinction is between "regret" and "apologize". With a side of "liar".

Doesn't matter WHO'S doing it or in what context.

Doesn't matter WHO'S doing it or in what context.

I see you enjoy being wrong.

I uh, know what my own point is, Doodles.

 

[ogibillm]

I disagree. Evil triumphs when good men (or women) do nothing.

She's a Supreme Court Justice they are prevented from voicing their personal opinions about POTUS contests. She broke the law, and she violated her Code of Ethics. Color me unsurprised that you have no problem with that violation.

Uh --- really.

What "law" would this be then?

"Canon 2, which provides that “[a] judge shall perform the duties of judicial office impartially, competently and diligently.” It also could violate Rule 2.1 of Canon 2, which provides that the judicial duties of a judge take precedence over all the judge’s personal and extrajudicial activities."

Explain how stating her opinion is "performing the duties of judicial office".

Yeppers. You're a stupid one too. Judicial duties are always supposed to be based on impartial analysis, her declaration IS a demonstration of partiality. You really ARE a clown....

do you doubt that the other justices also have opinions on the candidates and race?

 

[OldLady]

That's right Ginsberg!
Guess the old hag has lost her mind.
BUT! She helped Trump get another 100K votes. Thanks bitch!
Every vote helps.
These LIBs can't help themselves.
Emotional hemophiliacs.

She's an 83 year old Jewish grandmother. Done well to keep quiet this long. I'm kind of sorry she apologized. Why do so many people LOVE Trump for being politically incorrect, but an 83 year old woman tries it and BLAM. Hang her.

you forgot to mention she is a supreme court justice.....there lies the difference....

Because she is a Supreme Court Justice she can't have a personal opinion?

Apparently not.

no apparently she can.....so you will just go with that instead of replying to what i and a few others said above?.....

Jesus, Harry--I already said what I had to say.

 

[bodecea]

She proved she was biased when saying it and a liar by claiming she was sorry for doing so.

lol. biased? maybe you could claim bias if something about the election ended up in front of the court...

and nothing about expressing regret makes one a liar

Sandra Day O'Connor "regrets" Bush v. Gore too. Wonder if this crowd would paint her a "liar".

AFTER she left the bench.

Or did you think she was still on the bench, and Bush was president in 2013?

Doesn't matter --- the contrast there is between "apologize" and "regret".

Both Justices expressed a "regret" but in the present case you tried to make it into an "apology". So did the OP.
You even extended it to "liar".

Just using your own logic.

Sandra is no longer bound by the restrictions of her former position.

Ruth still is.

As was Scalia...but don't see any RWRS wagging their fingers over him publicly expressing his opinion.......first.