http://twitchy.com/amy-curtis/2024/06/22/shocker-robert-reich-and-others-lie-about-thomas-dissent-in-rahimi-n2397529
The Left's persistent attacks on the Supreme Court, and specifically Justice Clarence Thomas, are the actual threat to democracy and undermine the rule of law. The agenda is clear: they're LIVID the court has a conservative majority (thank you, President Trump!) and is no longer under their control.
"... they're LIVID the court has a conservative majority ... and is no longer under their control."
THAT is the entire crux of the libtards' angst about The Supreme Court - period, end of story. If The Supreme Court was dominated by leftist activists who persistently ignore The Constitution to LEGISLATE from the bench, then they would be fat, dumb & happy about it.
So they'll destroy the Constitution and the rule of law to get their way. And part of that plan is to lie and smear the Justices. They seem to have a special hatred for Justice Clarence Thomas (just a bit racist, no?)
So after the ruling in U.S. v. Rahimi (read more about it here, and read about Shannon Watts' hot take here), it's no surprise Leftist goons are out lying about Thomas' dissent on X.
We'll start with the petulant little gnome Robert Reich.
Robert Reich's height matches his intellectual honesty and his stature = nonexistent.
Robert Reich (@RBReich) ~ Clarence Thomas thinks that domestic abusers should be allowed to keep their guns.
That's not actually what he said at all.
Liar.
Stealth Warthog (@StealthWarthog) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} That's not what he wrote:
Of course it's not.
The midget is a liar.
Dan Chern (@DanChern) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} Since we know you can read, you are an obvious liar.
Grayson Moulton (@graysonmoulton) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} To the surprise of no one, you misrepresent the views of Justice Thomas.
Will Swaim (@WillSwaim) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} Dear God, Robert. He's talking about people who are "accused." Or have you given up on presumed innocence?
Sensurround (@ShamashAran) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} Even if he did say that ... (he didn't) ... it should take more than an ex parte hearing to take someone's rights away.
Synthetic Flow (@SyntheticFlow1) ~ He had the only correct decision. NO ONE should have their rights stripped or suspended because of an accusation!
Brendan (@BrendanMcInnis) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} Supreme Court doesn't rule on whether "this person should be allowed to have a gun," but you know that. 🙄
Clarence Thomas has a strong argument that constitutional rights should not be revoked without due process and a restraining order is not sufficient to automatically ban guns.
EducatëdHillbilly™ (@RobProvince) ~ Rights should not be stripped away from someone not convicted of a crime.
Sensurround (@ShamashAran) ~ {Replying to @RBReich} I wonder if you think domestic abuser immigrants should be deported or not, with nothing more than an ex parte hearing?
That's different.
Because reasons.
Yeah, because it does not fit Reich's libtard narrative.
Remember when the Left blamed accounts like Libs of TikTok for bomb threats? Accused her of 'stochastic terrorism' for simply reposting videos of Lefties saying insane things?
How is blatantly lying about Justice Thomas' ruling not also 'stochastic terrorism' and an actual threat to democracy and the co-equal branches of government?
Oh, because it's (D)ifferent when the Left does it.
| 
