Ethics Quote Of The Week: Ann Althouse

“And I really wish Trump haters would move away from characterizing his criticisms of the 2020 election as “lies” and attempting to intimidate anyone who wants better election security — calling them a threat to “the legitimacy of American democracy.” Put your efforts into improving the accuracy of our elections, not denouncing the people who are telling you that they’re worried about the legitimacy of American democracy.”

That was blogger/lawyer/retired law professor Ann Althouse this morning on her esoteric blog.

Ethics Alarms has made this same point in various ways for many months. Of course, Ann is right.

11 thoughts on “Ethics Quote Of The Week: Ann Althouse

  1. Hate’s all they’ve got. Unreasonable, unhinged hate. That they spent years questioning the legitimacy of the 2016 election means nothing. Anyone who supported Trump is a Nazi and Nazis should never have their voices heard.

    This from the same crowd that told us that a riot is the voice of the unheard.

    • Yes. This is just one of the many Trump Deranged mantras. “Democracy is at risk” is my personal favorite. Which translates as “People other than Democrats and progressives may acutally have some say in how the country is run. Yikes!”

      • That is essentially it. I have no problem believing there are Democrats out there genuinely concerned about the direction of democracy; however, the mantra is just empty words by party leaders and their enablers who only want democracy in their image. They project their own designs onto their opponents and have been doing that for years.

      • These are the same people who defended Operation: Crossfire Hurricane.

        There is no evidence that Ginni Thomas ever encouraged violence or was even present at the Capitol during the riot. Thomas said that she attended the Ellipse rally on Jan. 6 but left early, before Trump spoke, and never went to the Capitol.

        On a committee that was tasked with uncovering what occurred on January 6th, Schiff is now saying that the committee’s jurisdiction would extend to what the Supreme Court did a year later. That is more than a case of “mission creep.” It is a radical departure from past practices and long-standing interbranch comity. It could create dangerous precedent as members use such committees to investigate jurists on the motivations or communications leading to their opinions.

        Once again, members like Schiff appear to be tossing caution to the wind to appeal to core constituencies. How exactly will Schiff and the Committee investigate Justice Thomas’ motivations and actions? It would have to demand disclosures of his spousal communications. It would also threaten perjury or contempt charges if Ginni Thomas is not accurate in her details.

  2. Recent ‘”reports” are that DOJ has opened a criminal investigation against Trump. (We’ve heard that before over the last 4 years so…”now we got him”). If a grand jury indicts Trump, any reelection plans would likely be doomed. Then 3 or 4 years will go by, he’ll be completely exonerated of whatever trumped (oh, see that) up charges. Democrat leadrership will say “yeah, but it worked” ala Harry Reid. The Democrat party’s modus operandi seems to be all subterfuge all the time. I like to call it “Connunism”.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.