Connect with us

OPINION

‘You Just Don’t Do It’: Federal Judge Denounces Alito’s Flags as ‘Stop the Steal’ Stickers

Published

on

A senior U.S. district judge is denouncing U.S. Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito‘s flying of two insurrection-related flags at his homes in Virginia and New Jersey, declaring the actions “improper. And dumb.”

Judge Michael Ponsor, 77, who has served on the federal bench since 1984, writes in a Friday New York Times op-ed that he has “known scores, possibly hundreds, of federal trial and appellate judges pretty well,” and “can’t think of a single one, no matter who appointed her or him, who has engaged or would engage in conduct like that.”

“You just don’t do that sort of thing, whether it may be considered over the line, or just edging up to the margin. Flying those flags was tantamount to sticking a ‘Stop the steal’ bumper sticker on your car. You just don’t do it.”

Justice Alito’s first flag scandal came late last week, when The New York Times reported an upside down U.S. flag had flown at his Virginia home jut days before Joe Biden was sworn in as President. That flag is associated with the insurrectionists who stormed the Capitol on January 6, 2021. As of January, more than 1200 who were there that day have been arrested and charged with crimes.

Alito blamed his wife, claiming she made the decision to fly the flag upside down, which according to the U.S. flag code should only be done to signal distress. Martha-Ann Alito, her husband claimed, had gotten into an argument with a neighbor and manifested her anger by flying the “Stop the Steal” flag.

READ MORE: ‘Investigate Now’: As Alito Scandal Grows Pressure Mounts on ‘MIA’ and ‘AWOL’ Judiciary Chair

The second flag scandal came on Wednesday, when The Times again revealed an Alito insurrection-related flag, this time at his New Jersey home, where the Alitos were flying the “Appeal to Heaven” flag which has ties both to the insurrectionists, and to extreme right Christian nationalists.

Justice Alito has not made any public comment defending his second flag.

Judge Ponsor offered up a hypothetical to counter Justice Alito’s claim his wife was to blame, in this case, an example of him presiding over a death penalty case.

“Let’s say my wife was strongly opposed to the death penalty and wished to speak out publicly against it. I’m not saying this is true, but let’s imagine it. The primary emotional current in our marriage is, of course, deep and passionate love, but right next to that is equally deep and passionate respect. We would have had a problem, and we would have needed to talk,” Ponsor explained.

“In this hypothetical situation, I hope that my wife would have held off making any public statements about capital punishment, and restrained herself from talking about the issue with me, while the trial unfolded. On the other hand, if my wife had felt strongly that she needed to espouse her viewpoint publicly, I would have had to recuse myself from presiding over the case, based on the appearance of partiality.”

READ MORE: ‘Going for the Jugular’: Legal Scholar Warns ‘Trumpers’ Want to End Major Civil Right

Note he mentions as a sitting federal judge he would have applied the same standards that jurors are expected to observe: to not discuss the case with anyone, including their spouses.

And should there have been a discussion, or if she were to air her views publicly, he would be forced to recuse himself from the case.

Justice Alito has not recused from any 2020 presidential election cases, any Trump-related cases, any insurrection-related cases.

That includes the Trump “absolute immunity” case the Supreme Court heard in April, for which they have yet to rule.

The Supreme Court “recently adopted an ethics code to ‘guide the conduct’ of the justices,” Ponsor observes. “One of its canons states that a justice should ‘act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.’ That’s all very well. But basic ethical behavior should not rely on laws or regulations. It should be folded into a judge’s DNA. That didn’t happen here.”

READ MORE: Trump Adviser Scanned and Saved Contents of Box That Had Classified Docs: Report

Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

OPINION

‘Hostile Takeovers’: Trump Says Immigrants Are Using ‘Massive Machine Gun-Type Equipment’

Published

2 days ago

on

September 25, 2024

By

With less than six weeks until Election Day and early voting already underway in four states, Donald Trump seems to have locked in on his closing message for what he acknowledges will be his final presidential campaign if he loses in November. It’s the same message that launched his political career nine years ago: attacking immigrants.

In a sign anti-immigrant sentiment is the highest it’s been in over two decades, Gallup reports as of June, 55% of Americans want to see immigration decreased. In October of 2001, following the September 11 terror attacks, 58% wanted immigration decreased.

Trump’s anti-immigrant attacks reached a crescendo two weeks ago during the presidential debate against his Democratic opponent, Vice President Kamala Harris. Seemingly out of nowhere, he dropped his “pet-eating” lie that would lead to dozens of bomb threats across more than 20 facilities in the small town of Springfield, Ohio.

“What they have done to our country by allowing these millions and millions of people to come into our country,” Trump said, attacking Vice President Harris and President Joe Biden. “And look at what’s happening to the towns all over the United States. And a lot of towns don’t want to talk — not going to be Aurora or Springfield. A lot of towns don’t want to talk about it because they’re so embarrassed by it. In Springfield, they’re eating the dogs. The people that came in. They’re eating the cats. They’re eating — they’re eating the pets of the people that live there. And this is what’s happening in our country. And it’s a shame.”

READ MORE: ‘Ain’t Taking Anybody’s Jobs’: Trump Blasted Over Haitian Lies, This Time in Pennsylvania

That lie was quickly debunked but Trump and his vice-presidential running mate, U.S. Senator JD Vance, continued to spread it.

This week Trump excised his pet-eating derangement, adding in another element: machine guns.

“We can’t have factories being built where you have criminals walking down the street with the worst weapons that you’ve ever seen, with machine guns and everything else,” Trump declared Tuesday at an event billed as a manufacturing policy speech in which he appeared to come out in favor of an assault weapons ban.

On Wednesday, the ex-president, a convicted felon who legally cannot own even a pistol, standing in front of a banner that read “Jobs Jobs Jobs,” expanded his claims at a rally in North Carolina (video below).

“But Kamala should have closed the border years ago, and we wouldn’t have hostile takeovers of Springfield, Ohio, Aurora Colorado, where they’re actually going in with massive machine gun-type equipment. they’re going in with guns that are beyond even military scope, and they’re taking over apartment buildings, they’re taking over, real estate – they’re in the real estate development business. Congratulations,” Trump said sarcastically. “These are, in that case, people from Venezuela. Young street gang members that were sent here by the Venezuelan government.”

Mark Jacob, an author and former Chicago Tribune editor turned media critic, blasted Trump and the mainstream media: “Trump’s lies to foment hatred against immigrants keep getting more vivid and unhinged, and major media are DOING A TERRIBLE JOB of explaining how dangerous this is.”

Luis Moreno, a former U.S. Ambassador to Jamaica, remarked: “Besides eating cats, Haitian immigrants are now deploying crew served laser beam systems. We need to find out who is training these people!”

READ MORE: ‘Hellscape’: Women Increasingly Charged With Pregnancy-Related Crimes After Roe’s End

Trump had made similar, false claims during the debate, saying, “we have millions of people pouring into our country from prisons and jails, from mental institutions and insane asylums. And they’re coming in and they’re taking jobs that are occupied right now by African Americans and Hispanics and also unions. Unions are going to be affected very soon. And you see what’s happening. You see what’s happening with towns throughout the United States. You look at Springfield, Ohio. You look at Aurora in Colorado. They are taking over the towns. They’re taking over buildings. They’re going in violently. These are the people that she and Biden let into our country. And they’re destroying our country. They’re dangerous. They’re at the highest level of criminality. And we have to get them out. We have to get them out fast.”

The New York Times reported Trump’s claims of hostile takeovers by Venezuelan gangs appeared to originate from allegations made by a landlord.

“As far back as May 2023, Aurora officials had been trying to force an out-of-state landlord to fix up three blighted apartment complexes,” The Times reported earlier this month. “In July 2024, the landlord, CBZ Management, which says it is based in Colorado and Brooklyn, offered a new argument for why it couldn’t repair the buildings: Venezuelan gangs had taken over, and the property managers had been forced to flee.”

Those claims were quickly repeated, and later, a public relations agent hired by the landlord sent an even more elaborate story to a local Fox affiliate as a “tip.”

On Tuesday a nonprofit representing Haitian immigrants filed criminal charges against Trump and Vance, through its attorney, thanks to Ohio state law that allows private individuals to do so. They have asked a judge to issue an arrest warrant.

Watch Trump’s remarks from earlier Wednesday below or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Impulsive and Ill-Informed’: Trump ‘Unfit’ Warn 741 NatSec Leaders Endorsing Harris

Continue Reading

OPINION

Trump in Georgia Goes Off-Script, Appears to Call for Assault Weapons Ban

Published

3 days ago

on

September 24, 2024

By

Delivering what his campaign billed as a manufacturing policy speech, Donald Trump in Savannah, Georgia on Tuesday appeared to call for an assault weapons ban.

Standing in front of a backdrop that read “Made in America,” the ex-president spoke to a small crowd in the Johnny Mercer Theatre, which holds about 2500 people.

Last month Vice President Harris gave a speech nearby, just a seven-minute drive, to a group of over 6000 supporters.

READ MORE: Trump and Vance Face Criminal Charges Over ‘Pet-Eating’ Lies

Trump called for a “manufacturing renaissance,” despite America already being in the middle of one.

After making extensive economic promises, Trump reverted back to one of the underlying themes of his political career since he came down the Trump Tower escalator in June of 2015: attacking immigrants.

“Your wages will rise, your costs will fall, your job opportunities will grow, because we will conduct the largest deportation operation, sadly, in American history,” he pledged.

But in order for that to happen, Trump said, the streets have to be safe and cannot have “the worst weapons that you’ve ever seen.”

RELATED: ‘Straight Up Fascist Project’: Vance Slammed for Vowing to Call Legal Immigrants ‘Illegal’

“We can’t have factories being built where you have criminals walking down the street with the worst weapons that you’ve ever seen, with machine guns and everything else.”

Just last month a U.S. District Judge appointed by then-President Donald Trump ruled the federal ban on machine guns violates the Constitution.

Gun violence prevention activist Shannon Watts commented on Trump’s remarks: “Hey guess which political party passed laws to allow those weapons of war on our streets…”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Conditional Adherence’: Speaker Johnson Slammed for Wavering on Certifying 2024 Election

Continue Reading

OPINION

‘Conditional Adherence’: Speaker Johnson Slammed for Wavering on Certifying 2024 Election

Published

3 days ago

on

September 24, 2024

By

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, one of the key figures in House Republicans’ attempts to overturn the 2020 election Donald Trump lost, came under fire Tuesday when asked if he will commit to certifying the November election even if Vice President Harris wins.

“Mr. Speaker, do you commit to observing regular order in the certification process of the 2024 election, even if Kamala Harris beats Donald Trump?” reporter Pablo Manríquez asked Tuesday (video below) at Johnson’s weekly press conference.

“Well, of course, if we have a free, fair and safe election, we’re going to follow the Constitution absolutely yes, absolutely yes,” Speaker Johnson replied.

Political observers were quick to point out Johnson’s remark suggests if the election is deemed not “free, fair and safe,” he is effectively saying he might not follow the Constitution.

HuffPost’s Arthur Delaney remarked, “monster ‘IF’ from the House Speaker who’s been insinuating all year the election will be tainted by noncitizen votes.”

READ MORE: ‘Unrepentant Fascist’: Trump Says He’s ‘Cognitively Very Strong’ in ‘Dark, Twisted’ Rally

NOTUS political investigations reporter Jose Pagliery added: “Quite the if/then statement. Conditional adherence to the U.S. Constitution.”

“The ‘if’ here is leaving open not following the constitution,” observed J.J. Abbott, former press secretary to Pennsylvania Democratic Governor Tom Wolf. “Remember Johnson was the ringleader of Stop The Steal within Congress in 2020.”

Less than 24 hours earlier, from his official House account on X, Johnson had posted a screenshot of a tweet from Donald Trump claiming Democrats “are getting ready to CHEAT!” in the 2024 election.

The day before, Johnson blasted Democrats for refusing to support Republican legislation Democrats say is designed to curtail and suppress the vote.

That legislation, Johnson and House Republicans have been claiming, would stop non-U.S. citizens from voting.

The Brennan Center reported on Johnson’s remarks with Donald Trump on non-citizen voting, and the expected but at that pint unfiled legislation. They called it “the Big Lie put into legislative language,” because “it is already illegal for noncitizens to vote,” and “voting by noncitizens is vanishingly rare.”

Johnson has used his official account on X to falsely malign Democrats over all-but-non-existent non-citizen voting.

Meanwhile, in October of 2022 The New York Times reported, “A majority of House Republicans last year voted to challenge the Electoral College and upend the presidential election.”

“The most far-reaching of Mr. Trump’s ploys to overturn his defeat, the objections to the Electoral College results by so many House Republicans did more than any lawsuit, speech or rally to engrave in party orthodoxy the myth of a stolen election,” The Times reported. “Their actions that day legitimized Mr. Trump’s refusal to concede, gave new life to his claims of conspiracy and fraud and lent institutional weight to doubts about the central ritual of American democracy.”

“In formal statements justifying their votes, about three-quarters relied on the arguments of a low-profile Louisiana congressman, Representative Mike Johnson, the most important architect of the Electoral College objections,” The Times explained, referring to the now-Speaker of the House.

“On the eve of the Jan. 6 votes, he presented colleagues with what he called a ‘third option.’ He faulted the way some states had changed voting procedures during the pandemic, saying it was unconstitutional, without supporting the outlandish claims of Mr. Trump’s most vocal supporters. His Republican critics called it a Trojan horse that allowed lawmakers to vote with the president while hiding behind a more defensible case.”

That Brennan Center article, referring to Johnson, also reported, “Never before in American history has a sitting speaker of the House done so much to denigrate the integrity of American elections.”

READ MORE: Trump Expands Religious Attacks to Catholic Democrats

Given his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, many seem unwilling to give Speaker Johnson the benefit of the doubt this time.

“If Harris wins, there is no chance they will comply. They’ll still try to overturn the loss,” commented national security attorney Brad Moss.

Barton Gellman, the well-known journalist whose work has focused on national security and who is now a Senior Advisor at the Brennan Center for Justice, wrote: “‘If’ ? There’s a condition on following the Constitution?”

“Should never put ‘if’ before ‘we’re gonna follow the constitution,'” commented Greg Nasif, press secretary to U.S. Rep. Alma Adams (D-NC), “especially if you took an oath before God on it.”

Watch the videos above or at this link.

READ MORE: ‘Impulsive and Ill-Informed’: Trump ‘Unfit’ Warn 741 NatSec Leaders Endorsing Harris

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.