Sometimes it isn't what's said but who says it.
“He (referring to Donald trump is a faker.”
“He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego ... How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.”
“I can’t imagine what this place would be — I can’t imagine what the country would be with Donald Trump as our president"
"If Trump wins, my late husband would say, 'Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.'”
The problem with these comments about the presumptive Republican presidential nominee isn't their content. The problem is who said them. That being Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
There are a large number of people who agree with these statements. It would be difficult to successfully challenge the factual nature of some of the comments. He has an incredible ego and a complete lack of consistency. He should turn over his tax returns. I can say those things because I'm not a member of the judiciary who may be forced to recuse myself from participating in legal matters involving Mr. Trump.
Justice Ginsburg does enjoy the same First Amendment protections as everyone else. No one is going to attempt to legally infringe her right to speak out. But it is unwise. In fact, it is dangerous for members of the judiciary to comment on politicians like this. She should not have done this.
* * *
Anyone who thought Mr. Trump would not respond to Justice Ginsburg's comments would probably be interested in purchasing the Brooklyn Bridge or investing in condo developments on the moon. This was an opportunity for him to make a valid point in a "presidential" manner. It was a soft pitch that even a semi-competent politician could have hit out off the park. Trump swung and whiffed.
The "Her mind is shot" comment would have ruined the impact of any appropriate comment about how wrong it was of Justice Ginsburg to comment on the 2016 presidential race in general and about Mr. Trump in particular. Any observer of Justice Ginsburg during this past term's oral arguments or anyone who reads her recent written SCOTUS opinions would see she's still sharp as a tack. Criticizing her mental faculties is as wrong as her commentaries on Trump were. At least this time Mr. Trump managed to avoid a critique of her physical appearance.
Calling her comments "...very dumb..." is almost as bad. There were a number of things Mr. Trump could have called them. Ill-advised. Wholly inappropriate. Not something a member of the judiciary should be saying. Any of those descriptions would have actually scored a point or two for Mr. Trump with those who are not already paying members of his sycophantic supporters.
Two wrongs don't make a right. This was a missed opportunity for Mr. Trump. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
“He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego ... How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that.”
“I can’t imagine what this place would be — I can’t imagine what the country would be with Donald Trump as our president"
"If Trump wins, my late husband would say, 'Now it’s time for us to move to New Zealand.'”
The problem with these comments about the presumptive Republican presidential nominee isn't their content. The problem is who said them. That being Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
There are a large number of people who agree with these statements. It would be difficult to successfully challenge the factual nature of some of the comments. He has an incredible ego and a complete lack of consistency. He should turn over his tax returns. I can say those things because I'm not a member of the judiciary who may be forced to recuse myself from participating in legal matters involving Mr. Trump.
Justice Ginsburg does enjoy the same First Amendment protections as everyone else. No one is going to attempt to legally infringe her right to speak out. But it is unwise. In fact, it is dangerous for members of the judiciary to comment on politicians like this. She should not have done this.
* * *
Anyone who thought Mr. Trump would not respond to Justice Ginsburg's comments would probably be interested in purchasing the Brooklyn Bridge or investing in condo developments on the moon. This was an opportunity for him to make a valid point in a "presidential" manner. It was a soft pitch that even a semi-competent politician could have hit out off the park. Trump swung and whiffed.
The "Her mind is shot" comment would have ruined the impact of any appropriate comment about how wrong it was of Justice Ginsburg to comment on the 2016 presidential race in general and about Mr. Trump in particular. Any observer of Justice Ginsburg during this past term's oral arguments or anyone who reads her recent written SCOTUS opinions would see she's still sharp as a tack. Criticizing her mental faculties is as wrong as her commentaries on Trump were. At least this time Mr. Trump managed to avoid a critique of her physical appearance.
Calling her comments "...very dumb..." is almost as bad. There were a number of things Mr. Trump could have called them. Ill-advised. Wholly inappropriate. Not something a member of the judiciary should be saying. Any of those descriptions would have actually scored a point or two for Mr. Trump with those who are not already paying members of his sycophantic supporters.
Two wrongs don't make a right. This was a missed opportunity for Mr. Trump. I guess I shouldn't be surprised.
posted by me at 10:21 AM
<< Home