Are There Insurrectionist Sympathizers on the Supreme Court?

Yes

Isn’t there a journalism rule about not having a headline be a question with a yes or no answer? Seems like there should be.
- Isn’t there a journalism rule about not having a headline be a question with a yes or no answer?
  To be fair, this seems more like a yes or really yes question.
- ...and why?

There are corrupt traitors and liars in the SCOTUS. Insurrectionist sympathizers doesn’t seem like a stretch

I mean Justices Thomas and Alito would sell their first born for a jet ride to an island resort

Or a real sweet RV.
Side note, as much of a piece of shit that Thomas is...his love of RVs is a bit endearing. Like watching a middle-aged autistic incel playing with his model trains. Except he's really smiling because he shit in your cereal, not because of the trains.

Yes. Full stop. No question mark necessary

Does the Pope shit in the woods?

Alito and Thomas have been biding their time on the Court, waiting for the 50 year conservative project to come to fruition, and now that it is they're no longer willing to play pretend as objective neutral jurists. Their argument is simple "we won, we can do whatever we want".

They’d be willing to pretend if they had to, but now there’s no need.
Unless a super majority were to get elected to congress, that could either impeach them or at least pass laws governing their emoluments and conflicts of interest.
- Just need a trifecta with a spine to kill the filibuster and pass laws. Or some executives with balls of steel to take the fight to the court and flex their own power in the law-enforcing part of the equation. They aren't omnipotent determiners of law.

I mistook the headline for an Onion article.

Yes. Coup plotter sympathizers, too. Don't forget the coup plot. The insurrection was more exciting to cover; the coup plot was (and is) the real danger to our country.

Do frat boys assault underaged girls?

Alito and Thomas = Corrupt facist traitors 🗑

yes

Yes.

This is one of the only question headlines I can remember where the answer isn’t no.

Duh. Majority of SCOTUS are a disgrace.

It’s a break of the normal rule that any article title that poses a question can be answered with ‘no’

This is what I never got about fascism until recently: It's the people in the system that bring it in.

Duh

Is the Pope catholic?

That's not so certain....

No. There are insurrectionists.

Well, to be an insurrectionist, I think you have to actually be there during the insurrection
- Do you think that they aren't participating in the insurrection? The presidential immunity question should be enough to answer this for you, before even considering that Thomas' wife was actively helping coordinate J6.
  There's a coup still underway and SCOTUS is right at the front of it.

Was that another court where Trump set his own people?

We have no room for rhetorical questions here. Please move along.

This is like asking if they lied about roe v wade during conf hearings.

… and sexual predators

Why can’t I hold all ~~these lemons~~ this common sense?

What a stupid fucking question.

You know usually they that for headlines with a question mark the answer at the end is always no. But I guess there's an exception to every rule huh?

Uhm .. the picture is missing the rapist justice

Duh?

Is there a need to place rhetorical questions as post titles?

I mean, you have a picture of them. I think you know... Is this some kind of weird fucking trick or something?

A nation divided is going to be split top to bottom.

Many such cases.

Have you been lost in the wilderness these past 3 years? Its pretty much taken over the media for both sides