AOC once again proves her goal in life is to become a national figure and not make life better for her constituents. She has filed articles of impeachment against Justices Thomas and Alito., claiming that they have failed to recuse themselves in cases where they can profit by the right decision. She is opening a can of worms that could come back and bite her and the Democrats on the butt. Her claims are ridiculous at best and political at worst.
Is it likely that her impeachment will be successful? Is it likely that this years Little League champions can beat the Dodgers? Well, they do have a better chance of being successful than AOC. But, the fallout could be bad for AOC. In 2025, Trump will be president and he can direct the DOJ to open an investigation into Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s book scandal.
For those of you who don’t know about this scandal, Sotomayor and her staff required venues that invited her to speak had to buy a certain number of her books. That profited her directly.
- A new AP report details how Sonia Sotomayor’s book sales intertwine with her service as a Justice.
- Taxpayer-funded staffers have at times pressured institutions to buy more of her books for events.
- “250 books is definitely not enough,” one aide told a public library in Oregon.
In one instance in 2019, a court staffer pressured a public library in Oregon to purchase more books than just 250 copies of her book “Just Ask” for an event with the justice, arguing that it was necessary to accommodate the expected crowd.
“For an event with 1,000 people and they have to have a copy of Just Ask to get into the line, 250 books is definitely not enough,” wrote the staffer, according to the AP. “Families purchase multiples and people will be upset if they are unable to get in line because the book required is sold out.”
VISIT OUR YOUTUBE CHANNELThe AP’s investigation identified similar instances at other institutions, including Clemson University and Michigan State University.
If convicted, President Trump gets to name her replacement.
According to the press release:
The first impeachment resolution includes the following impeachment articles against Justice Thomas:
- Failure to disclose financial income, gifts and reimbursements, property interests, liabilities, and transactions, among other information.
- Refusal to recuse from matters concerning his spouse’s legal interest in cases before the court.
- Refusal to recuse from matters involving his spouse’s financial interest in cases before the court.
The second impeachment resolution includes the following impeachment articles against Justice Alito:
- Refusal to recuse from cases in which he had a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party in cases before the court.
- Failure to disclose financial income, gifts and reimbursements, property interests, liabilities, and transactions, among other information.
The far-left Congresswoman made the following statement:
“The unchecked corruption crisis on the Supreme Court has now spiraled into a Constitutional crisis threatening American democracy writ large. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito’s pattern of refusal to recuse from consequential matters before the court in which they hold widely documented financial and personal entanglements constitutes a grave threat to American rule of law, the integrity of our democracy, and one of the clearest cases for which the tool of impeachment was designed,”
The Constitution of the United States explicitly outlines a higher standard of conduct for the judiciary to meet, far surpassing its existing bars on treason, bribery, and other high crimes and misdemeanors for all civil officers: the standard of Good Behavior. Judicial ethics and rules, to which even the lowest level judges are held, make those standards clear. The lifetime appointments of Supreme Court justices make enforcement of these standards a solemn responsibility for the protection of our democracy.
Justice Thomas and Alito’s repeated failure over decades to disclose that they received millions of dollars in gifts from individuals with business before the court is explicitly against the law. And their refusal to recuse from the specific matters and cases before the court in which their benefactors and spouses are implicated represents nothing less than a constitutional crisis. These failures alone would amount to a deep transgression worthy of standard removal in any lower court, and would disqualify any nominee to the highest court from confirmation in the first place.
Given the court’s demonstrated inability to preserve its own legitimate conduct, it is incumbent upon Congress to contain the threat this poses to our democracy and the hundreds of millions of Americans harmed by the crisis of corruption unfurling within the court. Congress has a legal, moral, and democratic obligation to impeach.”
Good luck with trhat, AOC.
