There is at least one federal judge who Donald Trump did not appoint.
By Bruce C.T. Wright
(Source NewsOne):
There is at least one federal judge who Donald Trump did not appoint.
And not only is she a Black woman but she also just happens to be the sister of Stacey Abrams, the all-star Democratic champion of the people’s right to vote who basically secured Georgia’s electoral college votes that ensured Trump’s election loss to Joe Biden.
So when U.S. District Judge Leslie Abrams Gardner ruled on Monday that two Georgia counties must undo their purging of thousands of voters from the election rolls, the Republicans who worked so hard to remove those names got very mad at what they called a conflict of interest. Adding insult to the injuries sustained to Republicans’ egos, Judge Abrams Gardner’s order came one week ahead of Georgia’s pivotal Senate runoff elections that will determine whether Democrats control both chambers of Congress.
The ruling allows more than 4,000 voters to keep their eligibility to participate in the election on Tuesday in two separate contests in which Democrats are trying to unseat Republican incumbents. Judge Abrams Gardner’s order followed a different judge denying a lawsuit asking for nearly 200,000 voters to be restored to the voter rolls.
The fact that the person who ordered that purge reversal is Stacey Abrams’ sister really stuck in Republicans’ collective craw, as shown by a series of Twitter temper tantrums.
Georgia Rep. Doug Collins tweeted that it was “a conflict of interest” for the “ruling on a case in which her own sister is a party!”
Texas Sen. Ted Cruz — yes, the same guy who once called Democrats the “party of the KKK” — called it “absurd” that Judge Abrams Gardner didn’t recuse herself from the case. Cruz, who didn’t have a problem with having Trump’s hand-pic-ked federal judges (he’s nominated nearly 300 of them, at least 234 have been confirmed) reviewing the results of the 2020 election, had the audacity to tweet Wednesday that Judge Abrams Gardner’s involvement in the case “undermines the integrity of the entire judicial system.”
They had no problem with Trump appointing a Supreme Court Justice during an election because he wanted her to overturn the results.
They had no problem with George W. Bush winning be-cause of a Supreme Court Justice appointed by his father.
But they’re mad about Stacey Abrams. https://t.co/P73nk8mWAj — Keith Boykin (@keithboykin) December 30, 2020
Conservative radio host Mark R. Levin actually tweeted that Judge Abrams Gardner’s involvement in the case was proof that “The Democrats are so corrupt and brazen they’re rubbing our noses in their crap!”
Of course, even if there was a conflict of interest — which there wasn’t — it’s something that Republicans haven’t complained about during Trump’s presidency that’s been chock full of flagrant nepotistic partiality.
Half of Trumps family has positions in the White House and y’all are making a big deal about Stacey Abrams having a sister that’s a judge…… pic.twitter.com/ozDQOD7RPG
— Ali M (@AliMcCool88) December 30, 2020
So why now? Could it be because they know that Stacey Abrams has been an electoral force to be reckoned with ever since she had her historic 2018 gubernatorial campaign upended by voter suppression waged by Republicans? (Voter suppression that’s been a rich part of Georgia’s political history.)
Vernon Jones — the Black Georgia Democrat who eagerly endorsed Trump’s failed bid for re-election — described Judge Abrams Gardner’s order in a tweet as “Payback!”
To be sure, Stacey Abrams has been largely credited for her role in getting out the vote in the state and her successful efforts at organizing against the aforementioned kind of voter suppression that tried to manifest itself in a voter purge. She also further solidified her place in American history as a member of the Electoral College for the state of Georgia earlier this month when she conducted the roll call for electors to cast their votes for President-elect Joe Biden.
That is the true source of Republicans’ anger, not a nonexistent conflict of interest.
