Keith Olbermann Throws Hilarious Temper Tantrum After SCOTUS Ruling

Longtime commentator Keith Olbermann has had a rough go of it following the Supreme Court’s unanimous ruling earlier today that struck down states’ efforts to keep former President Donald Trump off primary ballots.

Olbermann, a vehement anti-Trump critic known for his unhinged rants on social media, took to X to lambast the highest court in the land on Monday morning.

“The Supreme Court has betrayed democracy. Its members including Jackson, Kagan and Sotomayor have proved themselves inept at reading comprehension. And collectively the “court” has shown itself to be corrupt and illegitimate,” Olbermann fumed. “It [SCOTUS] must be dissolved.”

What started as a relatively typical Olbermann post then devolved into a full-blown temper tantrum in the threaded comments below.

In response to conservative commentator Gunther Eagleman’s suggestion to “cry more,” Olbermann appeared to attempt a comeback, but the CNN alum’s bizarre line fell flat, to say the least.

“Those aren’t tears, Fascist. They’re urine. I’m sure you enjoy being bathed in it,” he wrote.

Daily Wire host Matt Walsh quoted Olbermann’s unhinged and nonsensical post with a pointed question. “Keith, why is your face covered in piss?” he wrote.

Olbermann, never one to shy away from a battle of words behind a keyboard, then doubled down on his response to Eagleman.

“By the way, fathead, if this court now grants Trump this hallucination of “presidential immunity” it applies to Biden too,” Olbermann wrote, undeterred by the overwhelmingly negative responses in his mentions. “And he could arrest the justices and cancel the election and you couldn’t do shit about it.”

Olbermann was not alone in melting down over the decision; many liberals, including Colorado Secretary of State Jena Griswold, who spearheaded her state’s efforts to boot Trump from the ballot, also shared in his anger.

“I am disappointed in the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision stripping states of the authority to enforce Section 3 of the 14th Amendment for federal candidates,” Griswold wrote. “Colorado should be able to bar oath-breaking insurrections from our ballot.”

Hosts on CNN and MSNBC also expressed disappointment, with Dana Bash calling the decision “unfortunate” while admitting the framers never intended for individual states to unilaterally bar a candidate from office.

“Unfortunately for America … the court isn’t necessarily wrong that this is the way the framers wanted it to be,” Bash said.

On MSNBC, contributor Lisa Rubin tried to spin the decision as leaving room for other avenues to keep Trump from the ballot, including the possibility that he is found guilty of criminal behavior in one of his ongoing cases.

“You have four justices concurring in the judgment… that they feel they don’t need to decide that Congress is the exclusive enforcement mechanism,” she said, adding both conservative Justice Amy Coney Barrett and liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson saying “they don’t need to decide anything more than this is not a right that belongs to the states.”

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *