• Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito remains determined to weigh in on cases pertaining to the January 6 insurrection and the 2020 presidential election, despite the controversy over two flags carried by insurrectionists being displayed outside two of his homes.
  • But according to one top House Democrat, the Department of Justice still has card it can play in order to force both Alito and Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas — whose wife, Ginni Thomas, has also showed solidarity with the insurrectionist cause — to recuse themselves. In a New York Times op-ed, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Maryland), who is the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, wrote that Attorney General Merrick Garland's DOJ and several other top DOJ officials could continue to press the issue with the rest of the Court.
  • He argued that Garland, in conjunction with the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, an appointed special counsel and Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar (the DOJ official tasked with making arguments before the Supreme Court) “can petition the other seven justices to require Justices Alito and Thomas to recuse themselves not as a matter of grace but as a matter of law.”
  • “The Justice Department and Attorney General Merrick Garland can invoke two powerful textual authorities for this motion: the Constitution of the United States, specifically the due process clause, and the federal statute mandating judicial disqualification for questionable impartiality,” Raskin wrote, naming the specific statute in federal code. “The Constitution has come into play in several recent Supreme Court decisions striking down rulings by stubborn judges in lower courts whose political impartiality has been reasonably questioned but who threw caution to the wind to hear a case anyway.”
  • “This statute requires potentially biased judges throughout the federal system to recuse themselves at the start of the process to avoid judicial unfairness and embarrassing controversies and reversals,” he continued. “This recusal statute, if triggered, is not a friendly suggestion. It is Congress’s command, binding on the justices, just as the due process clause is.”
  • Source:rawstory.com

    If Biden Wrecks Trump’s Presidential Immunity…

  • Democrats and their friends on the left are hoping against hope that the Supreme Court rules that Donald J. Trump possesses only limited immunity for his presidential actions and is thus subject to prosecution by the Biden administration as well as local and state prosecutors.
  • As the ancient adage proclaims, be careful what you wish for.
  • President Trump’s DOJ could “go after Joe Biden for having cocaine in the White House” as well as “raiding his opponent’s home.”  Eric Trump suggested that the DOJ could even investigate Biden “for depleting the strategic petroleum reserve two weeks before the primaries in order to boost his standing by lowering gas prices.”
  • He speculated that the DOJ could pursue charges against former president Obama for “Fast and Furious, where he gives 2,000 weapons to cartel members.”  He speculated that the Trump administration could even “go after George Bush for lying about weapons of mass destruction.”
  • Stephen Miller, a former senior adviser in the Trump White House, suggested that “if they say there’s no immunity for official acts, the moment Joe Biden leaves office, every single red-city and red-state D.A. in the country can charge him for financial crimes related to illegal student loan bailouts … war crimes related to deaths of service members overseas …  human-trafficking, human-smuggling and, by the way, more election interference than you can even count.”
  •  , the hunters are becoming the hunted.
  • Source: americanthinker.com