She Who Will Not Be Recused

We’re referring, of course, to that hideous blob of barely sentient goo that goes under the alias “Elena Kagan”.

Now that OgabeCare is coming up for review by the Supreme Court you would think that maybe the words “a Supreme Court justice must recuse from “any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned” or that a justice must recuse anytime he has “expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy” while he “served in governmental employment” might apply to that horrid hag who worked for Ogabe as his solicitor general, defending OgabeCare against legal challenges, not to mention this lovely email message she sent to Laurence Tribe:

‘I Hear They Have the Votes, Larry!! Simply Amazing.’

You would think. Because if that’s not “expressing an opinion”, then we’d like to know just what qualifies as such.

But His Majesty fears that you would be horribly wrong. We have already learned numerous times over the past three years that the law does not apply to the Ogabe Junta, so we’re not exactly holding our breath here.

It would be nice if it did happen, if for once the SCOAMF and his minions were to obey the law of the land, because if she does not recuse herself, then we needn’t treat the descent of the United States into tyranny as a hypothetical anymore. The train will already have pulled into the station at the end of the line.

Thatisall.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
16 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Guest
November 16, 2011 07:48

Do you wish to be governed or ruled? For too long, the Judicial branch of government, has not had the best interest of America and her people in their law reviews. Only congress can reign them in. The executive branch is top heavy with appointed Czars and sycophants. Our Reps must be of such a caliber as needed to beat… Read more »

dcs2244
dcs2244
November 16, 2011 17:02

Release The KAGAN!!!

Sorry…somebody had to…

LC Aggie Sith, a goddess, only different, G.G.O.R.
LC Aggie Sith, a goddess, only different, G.G.O.R.
November 16, 2011 19:32

So if she chooses to stay on the case, can’t Chief Justice Roberts make her step down?

She was a big defender of this law as Solicitor General, and that alone is a conflict of interest.

LC Gunsniper
LC Gunsniper
November 17, 2011 16:50

THOSE are actual conflicts.

Dinner with a lawyer is a conflict of interest. A wife’s outside activities are conflicts of interest. Yet crafting the defense of the very piece of legislation that the individual will rule upon is not a conflict of interest.

really? …Really? …really?

tweell
tweell
November 17, 2011 23:38

Umm – it’s not who signed, it’s the evidence in the article. Good try at obfuscating the issue, but if you read the documents that were released (and there’s more, but they aren’t coughing those up even though they’re mandated to by law) Kagan was hip-deep in the law defense planning. To my mind, there is a large difference between… Read more »

LC Xealot
LC Xealot
November 18, 2011 08:46

DJ… Eating dinner with someone who possibly might, maybe, be involved in the case is nothing. Now, if said lawyer decided to suddenly gift a pile of money to said Justice… then you’d have a case here. Just because I eat dinner with my friend, doesn’t mean I necessarily agree with him on matters of law. I have a liberal… Read more »

LC Gladiator
LC Gladiator
November 18, 2011 11:28

I see DJ is baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack
:em03:

tweell
tweell
November 18, 2011 19:50

Thanks for the Jukebox, DJ. I really like it, there’s something for almost everyone there.

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 19, 2011 02:16

I have found a great explaination here courtesy of BiW and I would believe a real live lawyer over a former radio host who is so marxist he has two left socks.

But, hey, just because marxism hasn’t worked anywhere it’s been tried doesn’t mean DJ can’t call for a new totalitarism again.

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 19, 2011 18:05

Dj:

Typically, you never read BiW’s piece. Or scanned it, and when it didn’t agree with your viewpoint, ignored it.

Go back to occupying your momma’s basement.

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 20, 2011 02:02

Well, if the marxist asshole won’t come to his coming to Jesus moment, Jesus can always come to the marxist. From BiW: So as I understand it, (1) Mrs. Thomas called Anita Hill recently, and left a message that allegedly demanded an apology for the accusations that she made against Justice Thomas in the nomination and appointment hearings decades ago;… Read more »

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 20, 2011 02:05

Also, quit trying to cherry pick who to remove for conflict. ALL of those with a conflict should recuse even though I want to see this thing overturned.

Kagen, as I and others explained before, directly worked toward the passage of Obama Death Care.

If you think that’s cherry picking, you are a waste of oxygen.

ebrown2
ebrown2
November 20, 2011 13:48

Ironically, the most famous modern case of a SC justice recusing himself came when Thurgood Marshall recused himself from Muhammed Ali’s Supreme Court appeal because he was Solicitor General and thus Ali’s prosecutor during the original Federal case. :em03:

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 20, 2011 19:32

BiW established a solid reason for Kagen to recuse herself and that is where he left it. He attempted to deflect the argument on Thomas by misdirection to Anita Hill — which isn’t the issue here. Wait, why are you talking about Anita Hill, we were talking about recusing justices. In your fevered, syphillis diseased mind, you think that since… Read more »

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 21, 2011 00:35

It isn’t that she is just “involved” in the Tea Party, she is instrumental in it. Prove it please. No DUmmies, no Kostards, none of the other unbeloved marxist websites you cut and paste from. (a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned. [Emphasis… Read more »

lc purple raider
lc purple raider
November 21, 2011 11:11

I am tired of arguing with an idiot. Nothing good ever comes from it.

So, been argueing with yourself again.