Staff Reports
Justice Samuel Alito’s recent chat with President-elect Donald Trump has sparked a whirlwind of speculation worthy of any political thriller. Just a day before Trump made headlines by seeking to delay his New York hush-money case sentencing, Alito casually took a call from the former president—at the behest of none other than a former law clerk, William Levi. The call, focusing on a potential job recommendation, mustered enough eyebrow raises to rival a heated congressional hearing.
According to Alito, his conversation with Trump was as mundane as discussing the weather—at least that’s what he wants the world to believe. He vehemently emphasized that there was no mention of the upcoming emergency motion or any court matters at all. This seems to be yet another instance where sheer happenstance merges with legal theatrics—what are the odds justice would be in the mix? But of course, such stagecraft is a mere footnote in the grand narrative, especially when the liberal media is just waiting to pounce at the slightest hint of impropriety.
Collins: What we are learning is that President-Elect Trump did speak with Justice Alito in recent days. What makes all of this so unusual is that call came one day before Trump's legal team filed that emergency appeal to the Supreme Court to try to delay his sentencing.. pic.twitter.com/eWlxVrQ9sd
— Acyn (@Acyn) January 8, 2025
Then there’s Gabe Roth, the flag-waving executive director of Fix the Court, who branded the call an “unmistakable breach of protocol.” Apparently, allying a Supreme Court Justice with a former president seeking legal favor is now a cardinal sin in Roth’s book. Roth’s comments drip with theatrics, as if comparing this to a judge playing poker with a defendant in the courtroom. The irony is palpable, considering that those with vested interests in the anti-Trump saga often overlook more substantial conflicts right under their noses.
Trump’s legal team argues that delays in sentencing are crucial due to the potential disruption of the presidential transition. This move plays right into the narrative that liberal power brokers simply can’t stand the idea of Trump having any say in the matter—his very presence in any courtroom feels like a challenge to their power. The past year has seen Alito hounded by calls for recusal over alleged ties to Trump, spurred by flimsy claims associating him with supporters of the Capitol protests. Sure, his wife may have flown a flag or two, but such family quirks in the domestic sphere apparently merit a Supreme Court-related exile in the minds of some.
The recent phone call encapsulates a broader theme of the legal landscape’s volatility surrounding Trump. He continues to polarize and provoke through both decisive policies and the courtroom drama that seems to follow him like a shadow. As the nation braces itself for what’s to come, it’s clear that any connection between the judiciary and Trump will be scrutinized under a microscope—a necessity in the current charged environment where accountability is supposedly paramount, unless, of course, one is part of the “resistance.” This scenario only doubles down on the assertion that in today’s political arena, the game is rigged; it’s less about justice and more about who gets to define the rules.
