AOC files articles of impeachment against Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito
AOC files articles of impeachment against Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito
She's the best, incredibly inspiring.
Pretty open and shut for the both of them, presiding over cases they have material interest in.
Kick their ass.
Which is why I'm honestly surprised reich-wingers haven't tried to murder her
Knocking on wood.
There was that creepy anime assassination video by fellow congressman gosar, AOC has mentioned receiving multiple death threats and one of the capital rioters said he'd bring guns next time to "assassinate AOC", so awful threats are happening.
Same guy that tweeted a selfie from inside the capital "just want to incriminate myself a little lol.”
AOC is very clear that she believes had they not escaped during the riot, assassinations would have occurred.
I'm happy that she is safe.
Knock on wood.
She hasn't done anything to directly go after Fuckface 45. Once she does that...
They did, though, on January 6th! They were looking for her and others.
I’m sure they have tried, I’m also sure she’s probably pretty careful about her day to day life knowing the amount of potential enemies she has
Well.... they did just legalize gratuities for political favors.
Not quite as open and shut anymore.
Open and shut case… if the Dems controlled the house. But not enough democrats were voted into office, so these articles go to MAGA Mike Johnson, and unfortunately, his trash can.
But AOC knows this. Her goal is to keep this in the press so voters remember it in Nov. That’s the real play. No one is actually getting impeached this term. Mike Johnson is a Christian nationalist who loves what those activist judges are doing. No way he’s brining this to the floor. And if he did, AOC doesn’t have a simple majority.
Yea, open and shut objectively, not practically.
Good on her for keeping this in the news for another cycle. This doesn’t go anywhere after she hands them the speaker of the republican controlled House. Johnson is basically going to throw them right in the bin.
But I imagine her goal is to get the media to cover the drama, and therefore keep this corruption story in the news.
She and others should just keep filing articles of impeachment every week until Nov. Keep this shit in the news.
Forcing them to put it in the trash is good though... Another thing to report on so perhaps it shifts house seats a bit.
It also tries to help Democratic congressional candidates in close races. Once these get thrown in the bin, they can remind voters that if they flip enough seats, they can have meaningful impeachment hearings in the next Congress.
Doesn't matter, the attempt had to be made for a firm historical objection.
People have no attention span these days. Our media has trained us to move on quickly to the next thing. They will probably only cover it if someone makes a spectacle of it like Trump does.
Godspeed.
I mean, it would literally only pass if the nominees for their replacements were some of Trump's spawn, but I guess it needs to be done anyways to establish just how corrupt Republicans are. You know.
Again.
Thank you AOC for standing up for the American people! Her speech introducing the articles of impeachment is well worth watching: https://youtu.be/1H1R_qtPiVY
Thanks for posting this. I wouldn't have gone looking for it and it was definitely worth watching.
Time to write my representative in support, and have him laugh at me via bulk form letter!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., on Wednesday introduced articles of impeachment against Supreme Court Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, saying that their refusal to recuse from certain prominent cases "constitutes a grave threat to American rule of law."
In a statement, the New York congresswoman said that justices' refusal to step aside from cases "in which they hold widely documented financial and personal entanglements" has created an "unchecked corruption crisis on the Supreme Court."
The resolutions were co-sponsored by Reps. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., Rashida Talib, D-Mich., Bonnie Watson Coleman, D-N.J., Delia Ramirez, D-Ill., Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., Ilhan Omar, D-Minn. and Jamaal Bowman, D-N.Y.
Both flags have each been carried in recent years by members of the "Stop the Steal" movement, whose supporters claim that President Joe Biden did not lawfully win the 2020 presidential election.
Extensive reporting last year by ProPublica showed that Thomas has accepted lavish gifts like vacations and flights without disclosing them in official ethics forms.
In the aftermath of the election, Ginni Thomas also sent messages to then-White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, urging him to stand with Trump.
The original article contains 548 words, the summary contains 184 words. Saved 66%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Can't they just make it a law they can't be impeached? Can't they just say the rulings and bribes are official acts?
No, the court interprets laws. Congress writes them.
"We think the intent of this 'Impeach These Clowns Act' was actually to permanently enshrine our positions - so said with a 6-3 majority."
They can interpret the law any way they want. Nothing in the constitution restricts it in any way. They can literally decide that whatever existing law they want actually says that SC justices can't be impeached, and that would be the official interpretation of that law. There is no higher court to say otherwise.
So the law is that the sc presides over impeachment hearings in the Senate, once the house sends it over, can't they just dismiss the case with prejudice?
That's not necessary, as far as I understand there's a 2/3 majority required to carry an impeachment (not American, so could be wrong). That's not possible with roughly 50% republican votes. The impeachment can't succeed, but it's their job to try, and it also puts the evidence on the record.
And ensure that we align those who voted “the president should have the power of the king” and “I can be bought and sold” are at least written in history for their deeds. There’s far more that needs to happen, but this is a good thing
Meaningless since the Republicans run the House.
Action denied is just more evidence of their complicitness rather than supposed. Also makes it very clear who does operate for their constitutes and only for their self interest.
It’s not entirely meaningless. Her aim is to keep the justices recent rulings in the media so that voters are aware of them come Nov.
AOC isn’t a dummy, and she’s knows that Johnson will immediately throw this in the trash.
I’d like to see someone else do this next week, and then another person the week after, etc etc. keep doing it until Nov. Keep reminding voters about the corruption.
Yep this is as performative as the GOP threatening impeachment of Mayorkas. I get why she's doing it but it's going to be dead by Friday.
Truck nuts!
She has no leg to stand on... Corruption is legal in the US for high ranking officials.
Congress and Mullahs are on the side here lol
lol.
🙄
This lady will do anything to keep her name in the news.
This has as much chance of going somewhere and she does it being president which is to say zero.
This is political theatre to distract from the party's current issues.
You’re correct in that the press coverage is the point, and it’s impossible to get past Johnson.
I disagree that this is about getting her name in the press. She’s trying to keep the supreme court’s last session in the press. The media will focus on the court for a week, then move onto the new shiny thing.
The only way to keep the SCOTUS in the news right now is to do stuff like this. The big broadcasters flock to the drama.
"You said it, man. Nobody fucks with the Jesus."
Like her or not, that lady got some hard as steel balls. AOC for president woooo!
Hey, DNC, aren't you desperate to put a woman up for election? You've got a fiery, quick-witted, awesome, young one here that is full of ideas and not afraid to try stuff. The conservatives haven't had time to run decades of smear tactics against her and she hasn't been threatening her husband's SA victims. I bet she already has a plan to deal with someone accusing her of being born in Mexico (I understand she's Puerto Rican, but that's not the bogeyman) and shut it down before years of idiocy bring it up again.
She's standing behind Biden this time around. I'm hoping for a run in 2028. It would be the first presidential candidate in a while that I didn't hold my nose to vote for.
She’s a firebrand—that’s not an insult. But it is a fact that if the DNC puts her to run, she will mobilize a lot of voters who may otherwise sit this one out. Hard to say definitively how many on either side; but I think she’s likely more hated by the rightwing base than she is loved by the left wing/centrist base.
I don’t think it would be a good strategic move in this cycle. Although I’d love to see her in the Oval Office and would vote that way should the chance arise.
All evidence suggests that's the opposite of what the DNC wants
AOC suffers the same problem as Nancy Peloci: she's too demonized by the GOP. It's an odd problem to have but she would need to retire from the House for a few years and run later.
If you want AOC-like, Kathy Porter is actually a very viable candidate. The question is whether the DNC is willing to let her actually run or if they'll pull a "It's Hillary's turn" like they did to Bernie.
I'd vote for her, but I don't think she's ready. Better than Biden though.
Personally, I want Jon Stewart. He's not perfect, but there's not a single person on the planet better equipped to take down Trump.
I don't know if Jon or AOC would make a better president, but Jon would be better at campaigning against Trump.
But really just give us someone under 65. (Note: I'll still vote for the good person who's too old for the job if the alternative isn't better.)
I would gladly vote for her. Hell I’d even volunteer for her campaign.
What's an SA victim ?
Problem: The Democratic Party would rather loose than get a left-winger elected.
She would have a real chance at winning this cycle...thus there's no way they'd run her.
This will be the last cycle we have Democrats...a LOT of people are about to fall out of windows Russia style after Trump takes office.
The Supreme Court made him a king and people like AoC will be first on his hit list.
First and foremost, she isnt eligible to be president until next year. She's only 34, and won't be 35 until after the inauguration.Whoops, looks like I misread and was off by a year. I don't think it's going to matter this time around, but hopefully they keep her in mind for the future.
she only turns 35 in october so she's got a long future ahead of her but she wouldn't be eligible until 2028.
She's eligible right now because she'll be 35 by inauguration day.
OMFG Her vs trump debate. PLEASE!!
I don't want Trump to be around when she's running. 😇
On one hand, she has more efficacy in congress, on the other hand: fuck those fucking fucks AOC 24 let's fucking go!
Not really, the damage has been done.