Posted on 08/21/2017 2:24:01 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
At his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in March, then-Judge Neil M. Gorsuch spoke to Sen. Richard Blumenthal with grave sincerity, saying, “Senator, the independence and integrity of the judiciary is in my bones.” To Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, he promised: “I do take seriously impartiality and the appearance of impartiality.”
As the saying goes, however, actions speak louder than words.
Now that Gorsuch has been confirmed to the Supreme Court, his actions are beginning to bring his commitment to integrity and impartiality into sharper focus: It was recently revealed that the justice has agreed to speak to a conservative group at the Trump International Hotel in Washington next month.
As The Post recently reported, this property earned the Trump Organization $2 million in the first four months of 2017.
The Trump International Hotel has become a prominent symbol, in the heart of our nation’s capital, of Trump’s success at exploiting his elective office for personal gain. Situated on Pennsylvania Avenue just a few blocks from the White House, it shines like a beacon to those seeking to curry favor with the 45th president.
For one who promised to “take seriously . . . the appearance of impartiality,” it is time for Gorsuch to return to those words. Speaking at the Trump International Hotel does not foster the appearance of impartiality. It does the opposite. Gorsuch should reflect soberly on his decision to speak at his patron’s property, which lies at the center of not one but three cases that could come before him in the months ahead.
Upon such reflection, Gorsuch should withdraw from speaking at any of Trump’s properties and thereby begin to match the volume of his actions as the court’s newest justice with those of his words as Trump’s nominee.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
How much Soros money has been funneled to her?
But let me guess, someone like Ginsberg could run over a child and this woman probably would not raise any eyebrows, eh?
Talk to me about the “wise Latina” and those Supreme Court justices who performed homosexual weddings but did not recuse themselves...
Winning has turned in won on this front.
What a pile of fetid manure. Big surprise, a lib woman writes of her moral superiority in a liberal newspaper.
Still can’t figure out how a bunch of draft dodging baby killing looting mooching drunken druggie purveyors of perversion, crime and lies became the moral conscience of America.
Will they ever stop with the absurdities?
Ruth Buzzi Ginsburg.
The lamentations of the Left are just a delight to watch and hear. It’s a wonderful — and entertaining — thing to behold!
Neil Gorsuch doesn’t seem to care much about impartiality after all
Washington Post ^ | August 21, 2017 | By Elizabeth Wydra
I never got my hopes up on these things any more... there is too much money to bribe and none are exempt from accepting it. The left has a goal and a lot of money!
It’s a hotel.
It has Trump’s name on it.
Some Conservative group has leased their ballroom.
Gorsuch accepted an invitation to speak there.
Trump personally benefits in NO WAY.
Are they REALLY this slow on the uptake?
...but more than Kagan, Ginsburg, Breyer and Sotomayor.
There, I fixed it.
Contrast that with nominees by Clinton and Obama (Ginsberg, Breyer, Sotomayor, Kagen) and find ONE of them who isn't 100% predictable in every single case of any significance. I challenge you. Totally reliable left wing votes, every time.
See Ginsburg, Sotomayor
“The Trump International Hotel has become a prominent symbol, in the heart of our nation’s capital, of Trump’s success at exploiting his elective office for personal gain.”
That is patent nonsense. It was a success long before Trump ever announced his run for the presidency, and his companies, all of them collectively don’t need his presidency for their continued success.
Also, I am sure, Trump does not personally see anyone using, or not using his hotel in D.C. as a point to favor or disfavor them. Mere “appearances” are often not reality, and “conflict of interest” matters should, within the law, require bonafide tit-for-tat actions that are in evidence.
It would be unbelievable to me think Trump would ask “where did Gorsuch make that speech; at my hotel I hope”, or just as unbelievable for Gorsuch to say “Trump will see I am with him if I do this speech at his hotel”. The writer thinks their fantasies amount to a conflict of interest.
It’s not that they’re slow on the uptake, it’s that they’re propagandists.
The POTUS does not even take a salary.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.