Ginsburg Declares Sexism Was Major Factor In Trump Win As Court Starts New Term

225px-ruth_bader_ginsburg_scotus_photo_portraitI have previously criticized Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for her continued political comments in speeches to liberal and academic groups.  While not unique on the Court, Ginsburg is something of recidivist in abandoning the long-standing avoidance of justices of political discussions. Indeed, justices previously avoided most public speeches where Ginsburg has readily embraced her public persona.  Her latest comments occur on the eve of the start of the new term, a term with an array of major cases that arose from highly charged political conflicts over immigration, discrimination, and gun rights.   In her latest comments, Ginsburg echoed comments by Hillary Clinton that sexism was a big part of Trump’s victory.  It is precisely the type of political commentary that has cast a shadow over the credibility of the Court in earlier controversies.

I have long been a critic of Supreme Court justices embracing the era of what I have called “the celebrity justice.”  Justices are increasingly appearing before highly ideological groups and inappropriately discussing thinly veiled political subjects or even pending issues. I have been equally critical of other justices, including the late Antonin Scalia, for such comments. She previously called President Trump a “faker.”  Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg has been a notable recidivist in this type of conduct and does not appear to be deterred by criticism that she is undermining the integrity of the Court.  She is back at it with a new interview with the BBC.  Even after criticism for earlier comments, Ginsburg continued to publicly discuss the unfortunate times brought about with Trump.

Ginsburg, 84, has taken subtle and not so subtle shots at Trump, including expressing how the US is “not experiencing the best of times.”  She appeared to assure Democrats that the “pendulum” will swing back.  In her appearance before an enthusiastic  audience at New York City’s 92nd St. Y, Ginsburg responded to a question from CBS journalist Charlie Rose on whether she thought sexism played a role in the presidential election results.  The right answer is to say that justices do not, and should not, hold forth on political issues.  Ginsburg, again, dove right into the political waters and said that she has “no doubt that [sexism] did” play a role and added “There are so many things that might have been decisive. But that was a major, major factor.”

 Hillary Clinton and her key aides have blamed the election in part on self-hating women who would not vote for Clinton — dismissing that women could have entirely independent judgment rejecting Clinton on the merits.  Indeed recent polls show that Clinton would still lose to Trump despite his unpopularity with many voters.  According to the New York Times, Clinton carried only 54 percent of the female vote against Donald Trump. However, nearly twice as many white women without college degrees voted for Trump than for Hillary and she basically broke almost even on college-educated white women (with Hillary taking 51 percent). Trump won the majority of white women at 53 percent.  Clinton’s continued criticism of women as being self-haters was denounced recently as itself a sexist argument.  In an interview with VoxClinton said white women just do what men tell them to do:

“All of a sudden, the husband turns to the wife, ‘I told you, she’s going to be in jail. You don’t wanna waste your vote.’ The boyfriend turns to the girlfriend and says, ‘She’s going to get locked up, don’t you hear? She’s going to get locked up. Instead of saying, ‘I’m taking a chance, I’m going to vote,’ it didn’t work.”

It is not hard to imagine what the response would have been to someone else dismissing female voters as just a bunch of clinging mindless voters following the directions of their men.  

In the end however Clinton is a politician desperately trying to relieve herself of the primary responsibility losing to the least popular Republican ever to be elected in modern times.  Ginsburg is a justice who is about to vote on issues that deeply divide this nation.  With her continued refusal (despite prior expressions of regrets) from discussing politics, Ginsburg is undermining not only her own impressive legacy but the integrity of the Supreme Court.

359 thoughts on “Ginsburg Declares Sexism Was Major Factor In Trump Win As Court Starts New Term”

  1. Screw the pendulum — tired of Dem vs Reps – coke vs pepsi – ford vs chevy. Independents will support the candidate that best supports their ideals. And globalists/establishment folks need not apply!

      1. Yeah, the same guys who Clinton spent time entertaining during the election instead of campaigning.

        Ooooops? Push a sensitive button? Do you feel triggered, Ken?

  2. You say: “.. dismissing that women could have entirely independent judgment rejecting Clinton on the merits…” This is like arguing that Muslim women have entirely independent judgment about the value of performing forced genital mutilation on young girls, depriving them of any possibility of sexual pleasure. Why do they do it, you ask? Because this is what men want them to do and they have been taught to believe that because females have no intrinsic value other than to the extent a man can find a use for them, this is what they must do.

    Most women are not anywhere near as well-educated as HRC, and a lot of them buy into male stereotypes about educated women being shrews. Many women are sheep. No intelligent woman would find acceptable Chump’s pussygrabbing, chronic lying, purchasing a super model young enough to be his daughter as a an accessory, his arrogance or even his ridiculous appearance. So then, why would they vote for them? Certainly not based on “entirely independent judgment”, except to the extent that such judgment is colored by their desire to fit in with male stereotypes and values. Also, they might be reality TV fans. Again, nothing to respect there.

    1. no sane aware woman would vote for HRC – we like women who have actual accomplishments and have served the country like Tulsi Gabbard. HRC is a toxic person – just ask the people of Honduras, Syria and Libya.– or the Haitians who were screwed by her foundation.

        1. Hey Ken troll, it’s not only Trump – a long history of screwing them – a bi-partisan scheme of the vultures who lobby Congress.. Hey, where was “your girl” on Flint??

          1. Bet you are hoping Doc Price will take you and Jared on a plane trip through the swamp. Flint is now on your orange man boy.

            1. Nope Ken Doll: Flint happened during Obama’s admin and he did f&cking NOTHING to help those people out.

              1. Right, and during the ‘historic’ Louisiana flooding in August 2016 Trump flew down to help unload supplies and check on the situation. And where was Pres Barack Obama? That’s right, on vacation in Martha’s Vineyard watching the fireworks from the lawn at Valerie Jarrett’s rental home. But the media kept that kind of hush hush to protect their guy, of course.

                1. Says the juvenile who would be hard put to name one member of Obama’s cabinet, much less anything salutary they’ve done.

        2. Are you an idiot?. Trump waived the Jones Act to permit more relief to Puerto Rico quicker.

          Tell us Ken,’ in your ultimate wisdom’ (sarcasm alert) how Trump is screwing Puerto Rico? You don’t know. Do you just say these things because you think that makes you sound intelligent? To sound intelligent try and have some facts to back up your statements.

          Trump has been handling the multiple natural disasters in the US better than prior Presidents.

              1. SOT, aka DSS, wrote: “More wishcasting from Ken.”

                Says the one with all the answers.

                1. Who is dying while Trump allegedly attacks?

                  (While I borrowed your phrasing it is worth noting that your statement from a grammatical standpoint is racist).

          1. tRump waited an entire week to waive the Jones Act. FEMA made no plans for what would happen to supplies after they arrived at port. Without diesel fuel, there was no way for trucks to deliver the goods. In fact, without petrol, there is no way for truck drivers to get to the port to man the trucks. This is not good planning, and, no, he’s not doing a good job. Too much time has passed, and PR was on the brink to begin with. I feel badly for PR officials who are forced to say he’s doing a good job, because it’s not the truth, but there’s a risk that they’ll get even less than what they’re getting now, so they play along.

            1. Florida had a similar disaster after Andrew though on a much smaller scale. Ships are not navigating towards the hurricane. Trucks cannot simply travel to areas of need. Things have to be cleared or one will have a lot of dead aid officials. Live power lines kill. The hurricane devastated the island. Andrew was so inland and powerful it devastated the rescue crews that thought they were far west enough. These things are very complex and not open to quick, easy solutions.

              The President is president, but he is not governor of Puerto Rico that is not even a state. Puerto Rican officials have to assess the needs and make requests. I think the President is doing a fine job, but you expect the impossible from anyone except those on the left. Go ahead Natcha may political hay over the lives of the Puerto Ricans that are suffering. That seems to be your nature.

        3. Bill Clinton is screwing everyone but Hillary. Oh wait, he screwed her too, but in a different way. 😉

        4. Watch what Trump does as they rebuild Puerto Rico. He’ll do right by them. Watch him make Puerto Rico a state, too.

          1. I certainly hope not. Puerto Rico shouldn’t be a state and, in any case, there isn’t the public sentiment for it on the island.

          2. TBob – read the Constitution. It is up to PR to apply for statehood to Congress. They have held several plebiscites over the years, each getting closer to the magic number, but no cigar. They need a majority of the citizens to vote for statehood.

            1. I was just suggesting that with the total devastation and need to entirely rebuild PR from the electrical grid on up, that if any president were to preside over PR becoming the 51st state, it would be Trump. Probably not good for Republicans politically, but it would still be quite something for Trump to be the president to add a 51st star to the flag. And we all know Trump is not an ideologue, so I don’t think he would particularly care if we add another blue state — if that is the will of the people of PR. 😉

              1. TBob – if PR becomes a state they are no longer a financial burden, they are on their own. This is why they have held out so long becoming a state. PR was a financial disaster before the hurricane, not sure the aid is going to be much help. The only landing field is filled with people and they will probably have to send in Marines to clear a path for aid.

            2. So Congress is going to open yet another welfare office – another massive, American taxpayer funded entitlement for parasites?

              1. I agree and take back what I said earlier. I now have a different opinion about all this…Les deseo lo mejor, pero estoy asqueado por la politización de este desastre por parte de los demócratas, los medios de comunicación y los corruptos e incompetentes líderes gubernamentales de la isla que lo echaron al suelo mucho antes de que ocurriera el desastre. Y ahora estos líderes llamados están demostrando cómo son incapaces de manejar su extremo del desastre politizándolo y echando la culpa por sus fracasos, ineptitud, (y corrupción) enteramente en Trump. He cambiado mi pensamiento sobre la estadidad. ¡No es Buena idea! No ahora, de todos modos.

    2. Shorter Natacha: “I’m not accountable to anyone ever unless there’s some candy attached”.

    3. So Natcha, would the women who voted for Trump be more likely or less likely to wear CFM pumps than the women who voted for Hillary?

      1. Shortly after Melania gave birth to Barron, she was observed carrying him, as a tiny newborn, tripping around clumsily in CFM pumps. She was probably clumsy because of changes to her body, having just given birth, plus the awkwardness of carrying a baby using both arms. A woman reporter remarked about this to her, and she replied that she wore them because The Donald wanted her to. These shoes used to be the sole province of strippers, dominatrix and slutty women. (pun intended). Maybe they still are.

        1. You’re retailing a story about what shoes she was wearing on a particular day 11 years ago? Do you go trolling through back issues of People looking for this stuff or does Rachel MadCow have a convenient compendium on her show site?

          1. Not only the trolling, but how did the reporter know “The Donald wanted her to”?

            The use of intellect when posting on this blog is too frequently at a disturbing low level.

            Natacha don’t you bother using your intellect in thinking how the reporter would know?

              1. She was also once employed to take lesbo pics, too. Marilyn posed nude for Playboy, so that’s not a very good comparison. Jackie Kennedy, a lady, never did either of these things, and she never wore CFM pumps, either. Neither did Pat Nixon, Laura Bush, Michelle Obama, Nancy Reagan, Betty Ford, Mamie Eisenhower, Bess Truman or any other real first lady.

                1. Natacha – Jacqueline Kennedy had a series of lovers while she was in the WH. Maybe not as many as her husband, but she was a trier. 🙂

                  1. Paul, not only that but Jackie married Onassis for $$$. Don’t get me wrong, I think she was a fascinating and intelligent woman, but certainly no “lady” =)

                    “Natacha’s” bitterness toward Melania is hilarious IMO – I wonder, is she a very ugly and bitter Lesbian who can’t even attract those from her own tribe?

                    1. Autumn,
                      Her posts are ugly and bitter. Her outward appearance would never be able to hide that. Think Shallow Hal. 🙂

                  2. Natacha – Jacqueline Kennedy had a series of lovers while she was in the WH.

                    I’m fascinated as to who is peddling this meme.

                2. and she never wore CFM pumps,

                  Again, Melania has sets of stiletto heeled shoes. My mother also had some stiletto heels. Indubitably Jackie Kennedy did as well. Not very practical, but women just aren’t when it comes to shoes.

            1. Pay attention: “she replied” to the reporter’s comment about the difficulty of walking and carrying a newborn (who, as we know needs his head supported) while wearing 4 1/2 – inch stilettos.

                1. If you walk in heels all the time, you need to continue doing it. Your calf muscles are used to it and not used to flats. I learned this from my mother who wore heels everywhere. She had been wearing heels since she was 15. Now she didn’t wear a 4 1/2 inch stilleto, but she did have 3-inch stilletos for special occasions.

                    1. StepOnToads – if you switch out all the time that is fine, however, if, like my mother you always wore 3-inch heels even her bedroom slippers needed a lift in them.

                    2. Hillary left her footwear on a sidewalk in New York when she experienced a medical issue. It was no doubt a sexist medical issue. Or those ominopotent Russians managed to hack Hillary’s brain and make her collapse as their secret agent videoed the episode.

              1. Natacha, if it’s any consolation, the men on this blawg know more about women’s shoes than I do.

                Does this mean that they’re all slender, pretty-boy foot fetishists?

        2. Now you’re just picking the fly $hit out of the pepper. Your whining eclipses anything my 9 year old does, but at least he’s going in the right direction. When your complaints about this President stoop to this sort of garbage, I know he is doing just fine.

    4. “his arrogance”

      Good grief. Hillary is plenty arrogant.

      She felt she did not have to follow proper procedures for handling sensitive material like other little people do and Bleachbitted it to be sure. She lied about the real cause of the Benghazi tragedy. The campaign was all about her getting to wear the title of first woman president instead of serving the country.

      Both candidates were/are deeply flawed. She is no innocent little lamb.

  3. Ginzburger comes out supporting sex age of consent for 12 year olds and now OK’s women like Clinton victimizing other women. Time for the pill Gizzzrdberger your party card is reaching it’s non renewal date.

  4. “Ginsburg, 84, has taken subtle and not so subtle shots at Trump”

    Some people at 84 lose certain inhibitions. It’s sad to see this happen especially for a justice on the Supreme Court. I don’t think she is capable of adequately fulfilling her office, but I don’t think there is any way to remove her. I wish Scalia was alive. They were friends and maybe he could have talked to her.

    1. How about that hideous nasty wretch STFU and go away? As a woman I don’t appreciate her attitude towards those who refused to turn out for HRC. Why doesn’t she applaud those who voted for Jill Stein? She is a disgusting party hack.

        1. You are a disgusting POS. All you have is the pathetic “it was the Russians” narrative But hey, I guess Soros is paying you to post your mindless bs

    2. Allan – I will be 74 next week and I have reached the point where I don’t much care what people think about what I say or do. The day will come when you too will say to yourself and maybe others, screw it, I am too old to put up with this crap.

      1. Paul, I never worried about what people thought about me. I worried about more important things such as my kids and my integrity. It’s the latter where Ginsberg has failed. If I were her I would have packed it in.

    1. She’s a judge and her position requires certain rubrics be observed. This isn’t that difficult.

    2. David, Ginsberg has been saying these things for quite awhile so no one is denying her freedom of speech. As a Supreme Court Justice that type of comment is inappropriate because it creates the belief that the justice cannot be impartial. You are retired so you went to school at a time they taught civics, right? Where were you?

      1. David has no principles, merely improvisations to be used to make rhetorical points.

        1. You are probably right. He is unprincipled, but all these comments from the left that have no factual basis makes one think there is some personality disorder that co-exists. Maybe a combination of the seven deadly sins. I know that envy is very pronounced in leftist thinking.

          1. Allan, please reread that last post of yours. “. . . comments from the left that have no factual basis . . . envy is very pronounced in leftist thinking.”

            You’re mistaking pity for envy, Allan. You’re the only one who envies your own pitiable plight.

            1. Diane, I reread the comment and it makes little sense. Pity and envy are two different things, though pity might be an excuse to hide envy. Is that your problem Diane. You are envious of other’s success so you want to pull them down and blame it on all the unsuccessful people? That is pretty much what leftist thinking is all about.

              Maybe you could explain yourself a bit more and then we could have a real discussion about envy and blaming someone else.

              1. Allan, you neglected to reread the part that you posted stating “. . . comments from the left that have no factual basis.”

                Now here comes the hard part Allan: What is the factual basis for your comment that ” . . . envy is very pronounced in leftist thinking” ???

                Scratch that head of yours, Allan. Scratch it good.

                1. All the comments that surround the emotional statement “tax the rich”. That is just one statement many use that very frequently is based upon envy.

                  1. No Allan. That’s spite. Not envy. There is a difference. The rich prefer to be envied rather than spited. Resented rather than admired. And, above all else, to pose as Holy Martyrs of taxation.

                    In any case, we spite thee. Exquisite. Delicato.

                    1. You wish to call “tax the rich” spiteful. I’ll add that to the list, spiteful and envy. Why don’t you explain the origins of spiteful and while you are at it using your words,”What is the factual basis for your comment that “The rich prefer to be envied rather than spited. Resented rather than admired.”?

  5. Wasn’t that grotesque woman supposed to move to New Zealand? Still clinging on to the Supreme Court out of sheer vanity – typical Dim! All this hype surrounding Killery still continuing is a clear indication that the cult remains true and more importantly deflects from the Swamp. HRC’s emails/ private server to avoid FOIA, the immunity granted to her cohorts, the Awan brothers infiltration, etc.

    This is a long show but very informative – I hope HA Goodman isn’t Arkancided… Guy is like a pit bull when it comes to the Clintons

      1. I’m good with it. Lock him up. Plus I stick my tongue out to Ken. I read Glen Greenward’s report on the Dept. of Homeland Stupidity stating they rolled back their election hacking claim. Thanks for the added gov-ment, W. Why do we pay taxes for something that works against our best interests?

        1. Thanks for the added gov-ment, W. Why do we pay taxes for something that works against our best interests?

          Homeland Security is an assemblage of agencies which already existed in 2001 or which are derived from agencies then in existence. The partial exception is the Transportation Security Administration, whose functions were formerly performed by local airport authorities. It was the Democratic congressional caucus who insisted they be unionized federal employees, not W.

      2. thing is New Zealand has a point system for immigrants and apparently that dispicable old crone did’nt make the profile.

  6. Any more political remarks by Ginsberg and she could open herself up to impeachment. Justices are supposed to be non-political (it is “written”).

    1. Someone should begin a Maxine-Waters-like-campaign of chants: Impeach RBG! Impeach RBG! Impeach RBG!

  7. Every time Hillary opens her mouth she confirms, affirms, reaffirms, and establishes the undeniable correctness of the final result of the 2016 election. And the 2008 election. Or was that sexism too?

    1. Every time RBG opens her mouth to insert her personal politics into the public discourse, she also confirms, affirms, and reaffirms that she has stayed too long at the party.

    2. TBob – right on. Each time she spoke her numbers went down which is why she didn’t give press conferences during the primaries. Anyone with any common sense distrusts and despises that woman! BUT the cult remains true to her

      1. Exactly right. Bitter Hillary the Entitled Sociopath is on her ‘I’m a Victim Let Me Tell You All About It’ never ending book tour and ya gotta wonder how many of her die-hard vocal supporters are actually on the Clinton Inc. payroll. Tell us again, Hillary, how you and Bill came to be worth some $400 million by giving speeches and selling books? Funny how we never hear Hillary say she will devote more of her time to the good work of her ‘family charity’ she was so proud of….what happened to The Clinton Foundation?

        1. Actually they are only worth 32 million. Probably spent a lot of money on lawyers…….something the Trump people are now finding out about.

              1. “Personal” email account does not equal having a PRIVATE server to avoid FOIAs, the deletion of emails, defying State and using a non encrypted blackberry while doing Clinton Foundation business in Russia, China, etc. whoops, I meant US State Department affairs…. Seriously, you need to wake up!!!

                  1. You haven’t the level of literacy necessary to make sense of the e-mails if you saw them.

          1. In a speech in Toronto yesterday Clinton talked about how “Trump attacked the only female candidate vying for the Republican nomination, calling it “exhibit A for misogyny.”

            Funny how she leaves out the fact that Trump attacks everyone from Mitch McConnell and John McCain to the Pope and on down the line. Does she forget how Trump attacked his opponents in the primary? Little Marco, Low Energy Jeb, Lyin Ted? Sorry Hillary, this is not about you being a woman. It’s just about you being you.

            And she also says she believes a woman will one day be President but adds, “I just hope she’s someone I agree with, so I can support her!”

            Say whaaat Hillary?? If you don’t agree with “HER” you may not support “HER”? What a load of crap you are.

            1. But women were all supposed to support you Hillary? Even women who didn’t agree with you? Just because you are a woman? But you wouldn’t do the same for a woman you didn’t agree with. Lock her up already.

              1. TBob – Hillary was supposed to get all the “Vagina vote.” She is really upset because so many women rejected her vagina. 😉

            2. TBob: That biatch will only support a globalist corporate whore like herself — ie Kamala Harris – woman of color new wunderkind. Beholden to lobbyists and intent on destroying this nation. Well forget about it. Indies will defeat her along with conservatives.

        2. well, TBob, maybe ask the Haitians who were screwed out of millions by kindly folk who donated to them through the corrupt Clinton Foundation!

  8. Anyone out there recall the Allan Sherman song called “Little David Susskind, Shut UP! ?

    Substitute some words:

    Old Lady Ginsburg… Shut Up.
    Old Lady Ginsburg shut up!
    I don’t care what the people say…
    Ruth is mean as a hens artFay.

  9. There must be a way to retire Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, she has served the people and it is past time to retire. She is interfering with the Constitutional Law and new blood needs a chance to show their love and respect for their country.

  10. What do you expect; she’s a woman. Whoops!!!! But really, on the week, of the month, of the passing of that icon of liberalism, libertarianism, equality, a great protester against racial discrimination, a tireless advocate for the advancement of women and women’s issues, our beloved Hef; how can she spout this stuff? Isn’t there a thirty day waiting period after the passing of an icon of Hef’s magnitude before any subject remotely related with the subject can be surfaced. She must go.

  11. Is it any wonder that a large percentage of Americans cannot identify the 3 branches of government; when the Executive functions as the Legislative and the Judicial legislates from the bench while blocking the Executive?

  12. It would be a cold day in hell before my wife ever did what I TOLD her to do. She MIGHT do it if I ask nicely, 🙂 My wife and I discuss voting issues, however, we never try to influence the others vote. Both Hillary and Ginburg are looking for scapegoats. Hillary lost, she was a terrible candidate. Get over it.

    I someone needs the nerve to tell Ginsburg to stuff a sock in it.

    1. Paul, you live with one of them too. I’m fortunate since mine is more conservative than me, but then again she isn’t American and had to suffer under a government some on this blog think they would like to live under. We always discuss who I am going to vote for because she wants to make sure she doesn’t have a repeat episode of her life before America which scares the sh-t out of me. She would never sit during the national anthem.

  13. We should be more understanding of Justice Ginsberg’s distress: she regrets the fact that, due to her egotistical refusal to retire during the Obama administration, her replacement is likely to be a conservative. As someone often says, “Sad!”

    1. Exactly. Lol. You snooze you loose Ginsberg.

      And for the ‘sexism’…. I’m still laughing. 🤣😂🤣😂

  14. It didn’t seem to bother you JT when right-wing judges speak at CPAC and other political venues.

      1. LOL! Yeah, shame on Turley for daring to take a stand on judicial activism. So you’re correct, he’s clearly not one of you.

          1. A clear bias is on display.

            He doesn’t toe your progressive orthodoxy line when it comes to the rule of law and separation of powers. So once again, he is not one of you. If that’s a bias, so be it; and get used to it.

              1. This is the conversation that I imagine goes on in Ken’s mind: Blah blah blah Fox News sucks Blah blah blah Trump sucks Blah blah blah blah Republicans suck Blah blah blah You suck Blah blah blah I suck Blah blah blah No, you suck Blah blah blah…..and the loop keeps on playing 😉

              2. Blah blah blah Who cares about Fox News or their bots.

                Your non-substantive response proves you to be on the wrong side of the issue. I don’t watch nor care about what Fox News or any other media is reporting. If you cannot muster the objectivity to see the danger in judicial activism then you are part of the problem. This is not that difficult to understand.

Comments are closed.