Jennifer Rubin, the Washington Post writer and MSNBC contributor who still claims to be a conservative, made a fool of herself once again on Twitter.
Last week she swooned over Adam Schiff’s legal skills during the Democrats’ arguments against Trump in the Senate trial. “This is the most brilliant legal presentation I have heard,” she tweeted. “None comes close. The tone, the facts, the anticipated defenses. I am in awe.”
Rubin couldn’t help but outdo herself by taking her Trump Derangement Syndrome to the next level Tuesday evening. In order to convince herself the Trump defense team was failing hard, she mocked them by tweeting, “can you imagine if Sekulow and Cipollone had to try a case in front of a real judge? Bhahaahhahahahaha.”
can you imagine if Sekulow and Cipollone had to try a case in front of a real judge? bhahaahhahahahaha
— Jennifer Rubin (@JRubinBlogger) January 28, 2020
Do you see what she’s doing there? She’s saying they are so bad at their jobs that they wouldn’t be able to successfully argue a case in a real court. What a real zinger, right?
Well, Rubin probably wishes she’d done a little research first. If she had, she’d have found out that Mr. Sekulow has argued 12 cases before the Supreme Court, and won 9 of them. He argued his first case before the Supreme Court in 1987 at the age of 30, and the Supreme Court unanimously agreed with his argument.
Okay, so that was nine justices, not one judge.
Pat Cipollone, too, joined the Trump White House with a solid reputation in the legal world.
Rubin’s attempt to make Trump’s legal team seems like a bunch of fools who couldn’t find their way out of a law school library was so laughable that she immediately started getting flak on Twitter for her foolish and immature jab.
“Really, she’s just embarrassing herself at this point,” tweeted one user.
Another user found an article citing Sekulow’s experience before the Supreme Court, and proceeded to mock Rubin. “Now, I’m not a Washington Post writer like you, but I managed to find this in less than 30 seconds. I think the term for it is ‘fact-checking.’ You should try it.”
“Does the Supreme Court count, blogger?” asked Nick Searcy, the director of the movie Gosnell.
“If she’s this bad on basic, easily verifiable facts imagine how bad her opinion on more abstract and complex issues,” another Twitter user asked.
As of this post, Rubin has not retracted her statement. But, of course, what would you expect from someone who called Schiff “brilliant”?
Matt Margolis is the author of Trumping Obama: How President Trump Saved Us From Barack Obama’s Legacy and the bestselling book The Worst President in History: The Legacy of Barack Obama. You can follow Matt on Twitter @MattMargolis