https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattve...table-n2592740
They learned from the passing of Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg. They cannot have another aging liberal justice remain on the Supreme Court. Justice Ginsburg remained. Barack Obama even tried to nudge Ruth toward retirement
during a 2013 lunch with the late jurist. It didn't work. She held on, then she died, and President Donald Trump picked conservative Amy Coney Barrett to replace her. Barrett is the opposite of RBG, which sent liberals into full meltdown mode.
So,
with Stephen Breyer, another aging stalwart of the liberal wing, getting up there—it's the same game again. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) applied pressure for him to go, adding that the Senate was prepared
to fill a vacancy. And Breyer again said
he's not going anywhere soon. And yes, the Left was mad at him for simply doing his job. It's a lifetime appointment. These are the rules. Only liberals would actively intervene like this in a gross attempt to cling to power. Only the Left would trash separation of powers. These jurists decide when they retire. Period. Deal with it.
Well, on CNN, they had a little trouble with that last week (via
Newsbusters):
CNN again catered to concerns by liberals who are worried that President Joe Biden will miss the chance to appoint a liberal to replace Stephen Breyer unless the Supreme Court justice retires in a hurry. Chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin) even went into a rant against Justice Breyer for refusing to retire at age 82.
Reacting to an interview that CNN Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic recently did with the liberal justice in which he refused to commit to retiring soon, Toobin brought up Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg's unexpected replacement, fretting…
But, you know, the fact is if he waits like Ruth Ginsburg waited, thinking that, "Oh, well, you know, a Democrat will somehow replace me," you know, then we will get another Amy Coney Barrett when Tom Cotton is President, or, you know, whoever the next Republican is. You know, this is the kind of absence of strategic thinking that has done in Democrats on the Supreme Court, and we'll see if it continues here.
Hinting that Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT) might fail to serve out the rest of his term, Toobin complained that, by not retiring immediately, Justice Breyer "is gambling with the future of the Supreme Court, and, you know, Ruth Ginsburg lost that gamble."
"It's time to go," says Toobin. Yeah, I'm not so sure he should be commenting about when someone should leave a position given that he, as NB pointed out, was fired from The New Yorker because he whipped it out and started masturbating in front of staffers during a Zoom call. Only recently has Toobin resurfaced. CNN didn't fire him because they have no accountability standards, but dude—lecturing on who should go? Sit this one out, Jeff. And keep it in your pants. Breyer's an old liberal; he must go. What's next? Just die already? You know they've said this in private.
I thought liberals respected institutions, right? Yeah, up to a point. Until they see an emerging change they don't like, then all deference is trashed.
Nothing to add - good criticism oft eh hypocritical fascist DPST party!
CNN's Toobin Freaked Out Over Justice Stephen Breyer's Refusal to Retire...on His Timetable
