Disappointment from the Supreme Court
The last hope for a small glimmer of sanity in the years-long saga of the lawfare warriors against President Trump has been extinguished by a 5-4 vote of the United States Supreme Court in the following order, handed down late on the evening before the day the Democrats will have their most fervent wish granted: that President Trump will start his second term as president of the United States as a “convicted felon”:
(ORDER LIST: 604 U.S.)
THURSDAY, JANUARY 9, 2025
ORDER IN PENDING CASE
24A666 TRUMP, DONALD J. V. NEW YORK, ET AL.
The application for stay presented to Justice Sotomayor and by her referred to the Court is denied for, inter alia, the following reasons. First, the alleged evidentiary violations at President-Elect Trump’s state-court trial can be addressed in the ordinary course on appeal. Second, the burden that sentencing will impose on the President-Elect’s responsibilities is relatively insubstantial in light of the trial court’s stated intent to impose a sentence of “unconditional discharge” after a brief virtual hearing.
Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would grant the application.
This very disappointing order will present us with the spectacle of one of the most corrupt, if not the most corrupt, and unethical “judges” — a word I put in quotation marks to express the deep disdain I hold for this person, who has been referred to as the Captain Ahab of the Judiciary — passing judgment on the former and future president of the United States solely for the purpose of giving the Democrat party its “pound of flesh.”
It must be noted that in addition to Chief Justice Roberts, risibly referred to by the mainstream press as a “conservative,” the one person whose vote could have stayed this act of sheer ruthlessness on the part of the far left — but, inexplicably, didn’t — was Justice Amy Coney Barrett.

We should all heartily thank Justices Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh for their common sense in trying to stop this madness.
No matter what the Supreme Court held earlier in this term, no president in the future will ever be immune from this kind of scalp-hunting inanity.
This decision does not bode well for the future of our Republic.
Image via Pixabay.
FOLLOW US ON
Recent Articles
- Deep State Anatomy and Physiology
- Sisterhood of the Traveling Pronouns
- Trump’s Tariffs: A Chance to Bring Back Lost Jobs
- Trump's Six-Point Plan for Making America Great Again
- Make IRS Sauce The Same For Both Citizen Goose and Politician Gander
- 'Battle at the Border' Documentary is an Insightful Look at Immigration
- The NYT Prefers its Own Conspiracy Theories
- Would the FDA Pass Its Own Audit?
- War By Other Means: Demographics
- The Trump Administration’s Support for the Israel-Azerbaijan Strategic Partnership Can Benefit America
Blog Posts
- The Atlantic's phony migrant tear-jerker about a pitiful 'Maryland father' shipped back to El Salvador falls apart
- Rep. Luna, forgets she’s on the Republican Team!
- Veruca Salt politics or the inevitable result of ‘the personal is political’
- Taliban justice in the streets of Bordeaux, and a Sharia ‘mega city’ comes to Texas
- French judge releases an accused rapist because he’s ‘fairly integrated’
- The Luigi cult is still out there, gushing and festering
- In New York, a tax service company targets illegal aliens as potential customers for child tax credits
- When antisemitic leftists play the ‘Jewish card’
- FDA’s vaccine-rubberstamp Peter Marks forced to resign, and Big Pharma stocks take a nosedive
- Will Colorado pass what’s essentially a ‘trans blasphemy’ bill? *UPDATED*
- Elie Mystal thinks every law before 1965 should be labeled ‘unconstitutional’ and defunct
- The gift that keeps on giving
- Wasting time is hard to do – leftists still manage it
- Give Trump a chance
- Nina 'Scary Poppins' Jankowicz's ex-NGO partner makes clear 'bankrupting Tesla' is his most important accomplishment