Posted on 05/10/2025 4:16:18 AM PDT by MtnClimber
There’s a famous anecdote about Fred Astaire’s dance partner Ginger Rogers that she “did everything he did only in high heels and backwards.” I couldn’t help but think of it as the news broke that Jeanine Pirro was to be the new interim United States Attorney for the D.C. If ever there were an “eff yew” to the Republican establishment it’s this, because she’s every bit the dancer Ed Martin is, and then some.
Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), as you are no doubt aware, was the RINO roadblock preventing the current U.S. Attorney for D.C., Ed Martin, from getting a vote to keep the gig. Whatever Tillis has against him being in that post will not be alleviated by his replacement — which was no doubt Trump’s point. Trump must’ve looked around and thought “I got a whole conga line of pissed-off Republican lawyers who’d love to clean up this mess. I’ll just appoint one after the other.” And so it begins!
One can’t help but smile at the thought of Tillis, alone in his luxuriously appointed Senate office suite, hurling and smashing a crystal high ball of 12-year-old scotch against the wood paneled wall. How marvelous! Especially when you consider that his lame excuse for his comeuppance was January 6th. Pirro is, to understate the obvious, very unlikely to overlook the dark underbelly of the so-called “fedsurrection.” If anything, she’ll dance in high heels and backwards right into the ugly truth of it, and oh my, what Republican vermin will scatter away from that sunlight, huh? Because, as we all know by now, our problem isn’t Democrat versus Republican; it’s Us versus Them, the Uniparty.
Ed Martin, for his part, will go to DOJ to have a little look-see into what Biden did to weaponize Justice
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
When I was young, my parents spoke in PIG LATIN so I wouldn’t know what they were saying!! Took me YEARS to figure it out!!
😄
Tillis has some serious questions about his real estate transactions to answer.
File charges first. Get answers after he quits being a prick.
With pieces missing
The SCOTUS 'decides' what is constitutional vs not - and they can be very creative when it comes to 'basis'.
Just 1 example of how a SCOTUS can be creative: It uses the 'right to privacy' as the 'basis' for legalizing abortion across the nation. It took 50 years to overturn that unconstitutional decision. The SCOTUS has demonstrated that it can create a 'basis' when one doesn't exist. BTW - it took over 50 years to overturn Roe v Wade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.