The First Rule Of Judicial Ethics Is You Don't Talk About Samuel Alito's Complete Lack Of Them
Irony is dead!
Ding dong, fascism calling, wrapped in a flag and accessorized with a cross! Time for some Christian dominionism, everybody! And not the huggy potluck kind of Christianity of the Unitarians or Quakers, either. The role of dominating Christian God shall be played by Samuel Alito’s God, and he’s more like Louis XIV’s god, or an abusive boyfriend.
Rule number one: there are no rules for God’s voices on earth, AKA a certain 34-count felon and the holy Supreme Court justices who don’t need no stinkin’ enforceable ethics rules. And especially not for knight of the Sacred Military Constantinian Order of Saint George Samuel Alito and his petty neighbor-harassing wife Martha-Ann.
Now in an irony of ironies, US District Judge Michael Ponsor has been found by the Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit’s chief judge, Albert Diaz, to have violated judicial ethics rules, for accusing Samuel Alito of violating ethics rules. Ponsor published an opinion piece in the New York Times in which he criticized Martha-Ann Alito’s flapping of her MAGA-associated flags as “tantamount to sticking a ‘Stop the steal’ bumper sticker on your car.” Ponsor stated the obvious: “any judge with reasonable ethical instincts would have realized immediately that flying the flag then and in that way was improper. And dumb.” Which it was.
PREVIOUSLY!
I'm Sam Alito And I Don't Know What Possessed My Wife To 'Stop The Steal' Like A Dang Ginni Thomas!
But, HOW DARE PONSOR SAY SO? Free speech is for SCOTUS and their vergogna treason flags flapping for the purpose of shaming their neighbors and the gay guys across the lagoon from their beach house. It’s being free to accept gifts from billionaires and not feel bad about it. Or for Samuel Alito yapping to some lady he did not even know at a dinner party (who was actually Lauren Windsor) about how he was “fighting to return our country to a place of godliness” and “win” the culture wars. That couldn’t possibly diminish the public’s confidence in the independence of the judiciary or be viewed as a commentary on partisan issues, because Sam Alito was the one saying it, you see?
But free speech is not for little district court judges, who actually do have enforceable ethics rules instead of the bullshit “maybe we’ll try to do better about reporting gifts” ones that the Supreme Court not-imposed upon itself after ProPublica busted Alito and Clarence Thomas’s spendy vacations with billionaires. Within five days, a complaint was filed against Posnor, and now Ponsor’s been found culpable of misconduct, for engaging “in conduct prejudicial to the effective and expeditious administration of the business of the courts.” And Ponsor was forced to write a public letter of apology. Because, his op-ed could have been taken as “commentary on partisan issues” or “as a call for Justice Alito’s recusal from the then-pending January 6 cases.” The fucking irony!
Welp, get used to it.
[Wall Street Journal gift link/ New York Times archive link/ ProPublica]
"You keep my name out of your filthy fascist mouth, asshole. And that goes double for your petty hag wife."
--GOD, just now
They love free speech so much, until you use it to make legitimate, rational criticism, which certainly is not what it was enshrined to protect. It was enshrined to protect calling minorities slurs. Duh.