Clarence Thomas just a simple guy with simple tastes

[firegiver]

Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From Major GOP Donor

Island-hopping on a superyacht. Private jet rides around the world. The undisclosed gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the Supreme Court. “It’s incomprehensible to me that someone would do this,” says one former judge.

www.propublica.org

 

[nytigerfan]

View embedded media

Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From Major GOP Donor

Island-hopping on a superyacht. Private jet rides around the world. The undisclosed gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the Supreme Court. “It’s incomprehensible to me that someone would do this,” says one former judge.

www.propublica.org

Impeach

 

[CUT93]

I guess he should have just taken straight cash like the Biden's took from china. lol. That is apparently not a problem. #whataboutism😁

 

[BlueRidgedf]

Sounds like racist democrats who don't like Thomas because he is black.

 

[CUT93]

Sounds like racist democrats who don't like Thomas because he is black.

Absolutely! If he were an old white guy like joe, they would have no problem with it!

 

[hopefultiger13]

Same answer here as always. Prove it, and I've no problem locking him up.

 

[BlueRidgedf]

Absolutely! If he were an old white guy like joe, they would have no problem with it!

You got racist democrats all over the country, they really make me sick.

 

[BlueRidgedf]

Same answer here as always. Prove it, and I've no problem locking him up.

Democrats and their lapdog media don't have to prove anything. Who is going to call them out on it? Nobody that's who.

 

[hopefultiger13]

Democrats and their lapdog media don't have to prove anything. Who is going to call them out on it? Nobody that's who.

Are you kidding me... Trump accuses who ever disagrees with him of whatever he pleases and Republicans line up behind him. Take the Republicans in Ga. He accused them of dishonestly and being criminals w/o a bit of evidence and folks on here were ready to lynch them.

Is the press as a whole, biased to the left. Absolutely. But the Republican party has become the party of Trump and follows him without question.

 

[Willence]

Justice Thomas has only ever upheld the Constitution as is his sworn duty. He has done it better than most in our history. The thing people don't seem to understand is that judicial activism is the kind of thing that let us to the Dred Scott decision. It is a force for evil. How that is missed by people is beyond understanding.

 

[Jjh7]

oh now its a problem to receive benefits from donors? could be a case of classic russian disinformation. maybe if they made this kinda effort on epsteins friends and demanded full accountability i'd give a sht. sorry but if accusations and intent to demand accountability are a one way street you lose all credibility. when justice becomes about principal and not exclusively applied to targeted ideological opponents i'll care. but under current circumstance, bringing accusations against someone who's demonstrated no inconsistency in his opinions that reflects any form of untoward influence, it's laughable. how bout showing some interest in the money trail from 1mdb, ukraine, and china to current leadership and holding them accountable? then do the same for fauci and the covid autocracy crew, as well as epstein and friends. then we can talk about a supreme court justice who's consistently adhered to the constitution in rulings on every case he's opined staying in a nice house. until then, fk off.

 

[dpic73]

Justice Thomas has only ever upheld the Constitution as is his sworn duty. He has done it better than most in our history. The thing people don't seem to understand is that judicial activism is the kind of thing that let us to the Dred Scott decision. It is a force for evil. How that is missed by people is beyond understanding.

Except for the tiny fact that his wife is a Q-addled insurrectionist and he was the only dissenting voice in a case that might expose her complicity. Dude is compromised.

Fact Check: Was Clarence Thomas Lone Dissenter on Trump Jan. 6 Documents?

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is facing new criticism amid reports alleging his wife was in contact with Trump campaign representatives.

www.newsweek.com

 

[WapPride]

Responses went about as expected

 

[CUT93]

Are you kidding me... Trump accuses who ever disagrees with him of whatever he pleases and Republicans line up behind him. Take the Republicans in Ga. He accused them of dishonestly and being criminals w/o a bit of evidence and folks on here were ready to lynch them.

Is the press as a whole, biased to the left. Absolutely. But the Republican party has become the party of Trump and follows him without question.

The difference here is the parties involved, imo. Trump is an individual and politician on top of that. Sure, we would all like politicians to be truthful , but they are going to advocate for themselves - no matter what party they are from.
The press was given very broad power/leeway in the constitution for the express purpose of being able to inform the public. This comes with an expectation and responsibility to report in an unbiased manner rather than advocate for a person/party. As terrible as our politicians have been lately, the abject failure of the press to remain unbiased has had the largest negative impact on the country over the last 20+ years. This has been exasperated by the rise of social media as well.

 

[WapPride]

The difference here is the parties involved, imo. Trump is an individual and politician on top of that. Sure, we would all like politicians to be truthful , but they are going to advocate for themselves - no matter what party they are from.
The press was given very broad power/leeway in the constitution for the express purpose of being able to inform the public. This comes with an expectation and responsibility to report in an unbiased manner rather than advocate for a person/party. As terrible as our politicians have been lately, the abject failure of the press to remain unbiased has had the largest negative impact on the country over the last 20+ years. This has been exasperated by the rise of social media as well.

What do you think occurred ~30 years ago that allowed this shift from factual reporting to sensationalized garbage you see these days?

Spoiler

it was the fairness doctrine repeal of 1987

 

[yoshi121374]

The difference here is the parties involved, imo. Trump is an individual and politician on top of that. Sure, we would all like politicians to be truthful , but they are going to advocate for themselves - no matter what party they are from.
The press was given very broad power/leeway in the constitution for the express purpose of being able to inform the public. This comes with an expectation and responsibility to report in an unbiased manner rather than advocate for a person/party. As terrible as our politicians have been lately, the abject failure of the press to remain unbiased has had the largest negative impact on the country over the last 20+ years. This has been exasperated by the rise of social media as well.

I would actually very much agree with this. It also coincides with the rise of social media giving the far outliers an equal voice and adding to the confusion,vitriol, and conspiracy theories.

 

[anon_5e8aassgcbjz1]

Does that make him part of the Deep State? Asking for a friend.

 

[Willence]

Except for the tiny fact that his wife is a Q-addled insurrectionist and he was the only dissenting voice in a case that might expose her complicity. Dude is compromised.

Fact Check: Was Clarence Thomas Lone Dissenter on Trump Jan. 6 Documents?

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is facing new criticism amid reports alleging his wife was in contact with Trump campaign representatives.

www.newsweek.com

Try something new. Let's do facts. Point to any case you can find where he didn't follow the Constitution.

 

[Willence]

What do you think occurred ~30 years ago that allowed this shift from factual reporting to sensationalized garbage you see these days?

Spoiler

it was the fairness doctrine repeal of 1987

Actually reporting was never all that factual. Pick a time and we can list a huge mass of lies throughout the media. It's not real hard to find either.

 

[anon_5e8aassgcbjz1]

Try something new. Let's do facts. Point to any case you can find where he didn't follow the Constitution.

Do you think his wife's isn't a Q-addled insurrectionist?

 

[Willence]

Do you think his wife's isn't a Q-addled insurrectionist?

I could not care less. It doesn't matter to me. I don't care if she's a far left lunatic. Whether or not the person in question does their job is all that matters. This is something people don't seem to get these days. It doesn't matter what a person thinks and we don't have a right to know their views on every single thing. All we need to know is if they are going to uphold their sworn duty in accordance with the laws and the Constitution of our country. If they do that then what they think doesn't matter because they won't be governed by those views. No judge should like all of their decisions and some of them should make them sick. That's the nature of the job m

There's no evidence to suggest she's into the Q thing that I have seen. But she was into the election being stolen narrative. Are those things always going to be the same? I know several people who think that there were problems with the election but aren't into the Q crap. To my knowledge, she has not publicly disclosed these things. They were brought to the surface by leaked transcripts of text messages from a court proceeding. I'm not all that informed on this so correct me if I am wrong.

 

[anon_5e8aassgcbjz1]

I could not care less. It doesn't matter to me. I don't care if she's a far left lunatic. Whether or not the person in question does their job is all that matters.

There's no evidence to suggest she's into the Q thing that I have seen. But she was into the election being stolen narrative. Are those things always going to be the same? I know several people who think that there were problems with the election but aren't into the Q crap. To my knowledge, she has not publicly disclosed these things. They were brought to the surface by leaked transcripts of text messages from a court proceeding. I'm not all that informed on this so correct me if I am wrong.

I don't mean to attack you, but I don't see how one can't care about it. You'd have the exact same reaction if a Democrat appointee was married to a communist?

"Biden crime family & ballot fraud co-conspirators (elected officials, bureaucrats, social media censorship mongers, fake stream media reporters, etc) are being arrested & detained for ballot fraud right now & over coming days, & will be living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals for sedition." Straight out of Q. She didn’t leave it at, “I don’t like mail in ballots” or something

 

[dpic73]

I don't mean to attack you, but I don't see how one can't care about it. You'd have the exact same reaction if a Democrat appointee was married to a communist?

"Biden crime family & ballot fraud co-conspirators (elected officials, bureaucrats, social media censorship mongers, fake stream media reporters, etc) are being arrested & detained for ballot fraud right now & over coming days, & will be living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals for sedition." Straight out of Q. She didn’t leave it at, “I don’t like mail in ballots” or something

"Adherents of the Q-Anon conspiracy movement spread those and similar conspiracy theories throughout late 2020 and early 2021, falsely claiming online that officials including Hillary Clinton and Rep. Adam Schiff had been rounded up in mass arrests, sent to Guantánamo, and executed for treason.

No Biden allies, elected officials, bureaucrats, or journalists were ever sent to Guantánamo or put on trial for sedition in connection to the 2020 election.

Thomas espoused QAnon-adjacent theories in many of the nearly 30 texts reported on by the Post.

The first message Thomas sent Meadows referenced a since-removed YouTube video from Steve Pieczenik, a conspiracy theorist who has previously espoused the baseless theory that the 2012 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School was a "false flag" operation meant to gin up support for gun restrictions.

In another message reported by the Post, Thomas referenced a popular QAnon theory that Trump had deliberately "watermarked" mail ballots to find potential voter fraud.

"Watermarked ballots in over 12 states have been part of a huge Trump & military white hat sting operation in 12 key battleground states," she said.

The partisan review of the 2020 election results in Maricopa County, Arizona commissioned by the state Senate and conducted by the now-defunct firm Cyber Ninjas searched for such marks, but failed to uncover any evidence of ballots being watermarked.

In other texts, Thomas urged Meadows not to concede the election, privately trashed Republicans in Congress, rallied behind controversial lawyer Sidney Powell, and told Meadows to "Release the Kraken and save us from the left taking America down."

Clarence Thomas' wife told Mark Meadows that 'the Biden crime family' and 'ballot fraud co-conspirators' would be 'living in barges off GITMO to face military tribunals for sedition,' texts show

Ginni Thomas pushed QAnon-adjacent conspiracy theories and strategized about ways to overturn the 2020 election 'Heist' in texts with Mark Meadows.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[firegiver]

What do you think occurred ~30 years ago that allowed this shift from factual reporting to sensationalized garbage you see these days?

Spoiler

it was the fairness doctrine repeal of 1987

things have gotten wackier ever since. People claiming Thomas had upheld the constitution well I'd just point to the citizens united ruling and laugh in your face.

 

[Willence]

things have gotten wackier ever since. People claiming Thomas had upheld the constitution well I'd just point to the citizens united ruling and laugh in your face.

Citizens United was a solid decision that sucked horribly. From there, we should have worked together to deal with the unfortunate reality that decision illuminated. You want the Court to decide what is right. That is not their job. Their job is to show what is Constitutional. We have utterly failed with the rest which is why the left wants and activist court that circumvents the Constitution for the political power plays they desire.

 

[firegiver]

Citizens United was a solid decision that sucked horribly. From there, we should have worked together to deal with the unfortunate reality that decision illuminated. You want the Court to decide what is right. That is not their job. Their job is to show what is Constitutional. We have utterly failed with the rest which is why the left wants and activist court that circumvents the Constitution for the political power plays they desire.

This is such bullshit. It was not a solid decision. The key fact was that they categorized money as free speech it is a legal circus level gymnastic move. If money is free speech then some have more than others. Which quid pro quos reduces some people's right to free speech. It's not solid finding and it's not constitutional. It's what you conservative types call legislating from the bench.

That ruling threw gasoline on the problems in this country. Ever since then no one has worried about doing their damn job in Washington. Because dark money from superpacs are now allowed.

Also they overruled bipartisan legislation on the matter. So they usurped the will of the people at the behest of the ruling class corporations.

Did you know corporations have used the 13th amendment to lobby for more and more rights? They have us over the barrell. It's out of control and GOP and Dems have no incentive to care.

 

[other1]

You got racist democrats all over the country, they really make me sick.

Surely there are no racist Pubs all over the country!!!

 

[WapPride]

This is such bullshit. It was not a solid decision. The key fact was that they categorized money as free speech it is a legal circus level gymnastic move. If money is free speech then some have more than others. Which quid pro quos reduces some people's right to free speech. It's not solid finding and it's not constitutional. It's what you conservative types call legislating from the bench.

That ruling threw gasoline on the problems in this country. Ever since then no one has worried about doing their damn job in Washington. Because dark money from superpacs are now allowed.

Also they overruled bipartisan legislation on the matter. So they usurped the will of the people at the behest of the ruling class corporations.

Did you know corporations have used the 13th amendment to lobby for more and more rights? They have us over the barrell. It's out of control and GOP and Dems have no incentive to care.

Citizens United was a solid decision that sucked horribly. From there, we should have worked together to deal with the unfortunate reality that decision illuminated. You want the Court to decide what is right. That is not their job. Their job is to show what is Constitutional. We have utterly failed with the rest which is why the left wants and activist court that circumvents the Constitution for the political power plays they desire.

@firegiver is very accurate in this response. Citizens United was an absolute travesty of a ruling. You can be pro-smaller government and still recognize that this ruling, while absolutely diminishing government rule and promoting the private sector, has been a complete **** up. Unless, of course, you are so dead set in your ways that you think that anything the government does is bad, and anything the private sector does is good.

 

[Willence]

@firegiver is very accurate in this response. Citizens United was an absolute travesty of a ruling. You can be pro-smaller government and still recognize that this ruling, while absolutely diminishing government rule and promoting the private sector, has been a complete **** up. Unless, of course, you are so dead set in your ways that you think that anything the government does is bad, and anything the private sector does is good.

That's not it at all. The private sector requires regulation by the government to a certain degree. History clearly demonstrates that.

I don't like the Citizens ruling but it is constitutional. Now it is up to us to fix it. That's how it works. The problem we have these days is that no one wants to work together so we rely on the courts to bully through our policy points. That's not how it's supposed to work. Then we have to work together to fix it. That is the intended process and Citizens United would be part of that.

 

[WapPride]

That's not it at all. The private sector requires regulation by the government to a certain degree. History clearly demonstrates that.

I don't like the Citizens ruling but it is constitutional. Now it is up to us to fix it. That's how it works. The problem we have these days is that no one wants to work together so we rely on the courts to bully through our policy points. That's not how it's supposed to work. Then we have to work together to fix it. That is the intended process and Citizens United would be part of that.

Idk I’d say overriding 100ish years of Jurisprudence to the benefit of major corporations is something to consider. Listen, I’m a probably way too biased because I don’t believe any large group should be able to donate to political causes - businesses, unions, churches, synagogues, mosques, covens, whatever. It’s an issue that wasn’t too terribly an issue back in the 18th century because really the only people that had any say then were wealthy landowners, so what’s really the point?

 

[TigerGrowls]

Same answer here as always. Prove it, and I've no problem locking him up.

Lock him up for what? Would also have to prove it affected his decisions.

 

[Willence]

Idk I’d say overriding 100ish years of Jurisprudence to the benefit of major corporations is something to consider. Listen, I’m a probably way too biased because I don’t believe any large group should be able to donate to political causes - businesses, unions, churches, synagogues, mosques, covens, whatever. It’s an issue that wasn’t too terribly an issue back in the 18th century because really the only people that had any say then were wealthy landowners, so what’s really the point?

I have to say I agree with you. 100%!

Let's fix it.

 

[nytigerfan]

I have to say I agree with you. 100%!

Let's fix it.

Nah, let’s do nothing

 

[firegiver]

Nah, let’s do nothing

I promise you this is the hill I will always die on: the ****ing corporate overlords won with Citizens United. If we overturn it. Our kids might have a chance not to live in a dystopia hell scape. It's not looking good.

People these days don't read and have no concept of where they are in history.

Citizens united was a 5 to 4 ruling. It should not be taken as gospel.

 

[TigerGrowls]

Idk I’d say overriding 100ish years of Jurisprudence to the benefit of major corporations is something to consider. Listen, I’m a probably way too biased because I don’t believe any large group should be able to donate to political causes - businesses, unions, churches, synagogues, mosques, covens, whatever. It’s an issue that wasn’t too terribly an issue back in the 18th century because really the only people that had any say then were wealthy landowners, so what’s really the point?

I would agree with severe limitation of major corporations donating and the Super PAC's, but thats not all of it. Look at the articles I have posted showing millions getting anonymously donated in the name of people that are not even aware of it occurring. How many hundreds of millions of dark foreign donations are coming in at all times? How much laundered foreign aid from the US govt is coming back as donations to the major political parties?

 

[DW4_2016]

I could not care less. It doesn't matter to me. I don't care if she's a far left lunatic. Whether or not the person in question does their job is all that matters. This is something people don't seem to get these days. It doesn't matter what a person thinks and we don't have a right to know their views on every single thing. All we need to know is if they are going to uphold their sworn duty in accordance with the laws and the Constitution of our country. If they do that then what they think doesn't matter because they won't be governed by those views. No judge should like all of their decisions and some of them should make them sick. That's the nature of the job m

There's no evidence to suggest she's into the Q thing that I have seen. But she was into the election being stolen narrative. Are those things always going to be the same? I know several people who think that there were problems with the election but aren't into the Q crap. To my knowledge, she has not publicly disclosed these things. They were brought to the surface by leaked transcripts of text messages from a court proceeding. I'm not all that informed on this so correct me if I am wrong.

So, Hunter Biden is no longer a talking point. Excellent. Maybe you can inform your dumb friends.

 

[fcctiger12]

I would agree with severe limitation of major corporations donating and the Super PAC's, but thats not all of it. Look at the articles I have posted showing millions getting anonymously donated in the name of people that are not even aware of it occurring. How many hundreds of millions of dark foreign donations are coming in at all times? How much laundered foreign aid from the US govt is coming back as donations to the major political parties?

You do realize Citizens United and the other SCOTUS rulings that have destroyed any campaign finance laws passed by Congress are the reason why these things are able to happen now, right?
It is nearly impossible to be jailed for accepting bribes in office now. Just look at the decisions overturning convictions of Bob McDonnell, Bridgegate scandal perpetrators and Cuomo aides in the last decade.

 

[Willence]

You do realize Citizens United and the other SCOTUS rulings that have destroyed any campaign finance laws passed by Congress are the reason why these things are able to happen now, right?
It is nearly impossible to be jailed for accepting bribes in office now. Just look at the decisions overturning convictions of Bob McDonnell, Bridgegate scandal perpetrators and Cuomo aides in the last decade.

The decision was rendered in 2010. That's 13 years ago. We've had plenty of time to fix this. We've had plenty of time to demand this be fixed. That wasn't the endpoint; it was Constitutional clarification so that we could better articulate a path to deal with this problem. That we've allowed this to fester and permeate our politics so much is our doing, not the Court's.

 

[hopefultiger13]

Lock him up for what? Would also have to prove it affected his decisions.

Yes, you would have to prove that. Hence, my statement that you have to PROVE it. And if you can prove that this affected his decisions, you can lock him up. If you can't then all this is a bunch of crap.

You see how that works?

I find it interesting that you have no problems with ANY questionable connection from a Dem/Liberal being enough to post an article about how bad they are, but quickly come to the defense of Thomas. I certainly agree that Thomas deserves the benefit of the doubt here.

Remember the Governor, Lt Governor, and Sec of State in Ga? You consider these life long Republicans criminals based on no evidence but Donald Trump's word. I wonder what you'd have said about them if they'd taken lavish trips on a Democratic Donor's (say Soros's) dime (even if there's no evidence that it changed their decisions). I bet it would be a total 180 from your reaction to Thomas.

 

[ClemsonGentleman]

There's a very simple solution to this issue. Have the 75,000 new IRS agents look into whether or not the gifts were declared on their income taxes. If they exceeded the legal limit for gifts annually, they would need to pay income taxes on it. If they didn't pay income taxes on it, it would be considered tax evasion, a felony, and he wouldn't be a supreme Court justice very long.

Democrats ousting The first black supreme court justice in the United States, what a great headline!