Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the powerhouse Democratic Supreme Court Justice, made two fairly innocuous statements about the Cheeto faced, tiny handed, ferret wearing, shitgibbon that really got under his skin. Call the waaaambulance.
In an interview with the AP, Ginsburg said she assumes Hillary Clinton will be elected President come November. When asked about Trump possibly weaseling his way into 1600 Pennsylvania Ave? She said:
“I don’t want to think about that possibility, but if it should be, then everything is up for grabs. It's likely that the next president, whoever she will be, will have a few appointments to make”
A few days later, she was interviewed by the New York Times and said:
“I can’t imagine what this place would be—I can’t imagine what the country would be—with Donald Trump as our president.”
To someone with an open mind (and a modicum of thick skin) this would not be a big deal. This comment isn't an insult, it is a thought about how an election could change the face of our country. She isn't saying it would be bad or good.
Donald Trump wasn't having it and went on, you guessed it, a twitter tear:
Ginsburg reluctantly gave a non apology, apology. She was clearly badgered into this, but meh. It was lukewarm. Here is what she said:
"On reflection, my recent remarks in response to press inquiries were ill-advised and I regret making them. Judges should avoid commenting on a candidate for public office. In the future I will be more circumspect."
Esquire's Charlie Pierce said:
....anyone who thinks that RBG's honest assessment of the vulgar talking yam is on a par with A.) Antonin Scalia's hunting trips with Dick Cheney, or B.) the majority in Bush v. Gore including one justice (Scalia) whose son got a job with the administration that poppa helped install and another (Thomas) whose wife did, too, needs to seriously examine their consciences more than they did.
I will be told that I am a Bad Analyst because I am essentially arguing that multiple wrongs make a right, but I don't really care. Leave aside the historic reality that the Court always has been politicized, sometimes garishly so, but we are now at the end of a 30-year process in which a well-financed conservative infrastructure restructured the federal court system from top to bottom, seeding it with reliable judges who supported dubious interpretations of laws to which their ideological sponsors were unfriendly.
Ginsberg is not intolerant of conservatives; she and Scalia were opera buddies. But she's 83, sharp as a tack, and a survivor of pancreatic cancer, which generally gives you the same odds as stepping in front of a westbound freight. Her big bag of fcks was empty long ago.
Trump really needs to work on his thin skin. Poor guy can't handle an honest critique from an 83 year old woman. Does he not realize how much criticism the President gets on a daily basis?