ADVERTISEMENT

Clarence Thomas just a simple guy with simple tastes

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!

He isn't the first. But also, there's no harm in what he did from what it appears. It's just another dishonest attempt to stir that which has no merit for political gain. That is what we do these days.

The most humorous part is that AOC wants to impeach him and conveniently forgets about her transgressions is accepting a ticket to the Met Gala. Apparently her hypocrisy knows no bounds.
 
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.
I thought that you didn't respond to my posts anymore because I twist your words.
Also, I discussed 3 additional SCOTUS rulings in my post that happened in more recent years.
Nice of you to respond though.
 


Chalk up another victim of fake news. No surprise @dpic73 and @WapPride liked the post. They are continual victims of fake news.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TigerGrowls
I thought that you didn't respond to my posts anymore because I twist your words.
Also, I discussed 3 additional SCOTUS rulings in my post that happened in more recent years.
Nice of you to respond though.

What about those? McDonnell decision was unanimous. I'm trying to understand what your point is besides listing those and saying it's impossible to get a conviction as you stated?

You were twisting my words but I generally try to reply to most people with a few exceptions. No ill will at all toward you and I hope that holds true for you as well.
 
Guys. Putting partisan politics aside. This is just not ok.

1. Going on these trips isn't ethical or appropriate. That's an objective truth no matter who we are talking about.

2. Not reporting that he went on these trips is a pretty explicit and brazen violation of federal ethics laws.

Neither of these things are open to interpretation.
 
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.
I have a right to an opinion just like you do.
 
It's true, you want to see real racism? Go on Twitter right now and just put in Clarence Thomas or Tim Scott name and see the left-wing racists.
I did as instructed and combed pages for something racist. Here's an example of what I got.


Have you maybe considered that maybe you are caught in an echo chamber created by your own biases and supported by the algorithms you surround yourself with. This is just sad man. So many people are getting poisoned by social media. You might want to try logging out of your accounts for a while and see if the world gets a bit better for you.

Objectively Clarence Thomas is a goon and should be impeached for judicial ethics violations.
 
Last edited:
I did as instructed and combed pages for something racist. Here's an example of what I got.


Have you maybe considered that maybe you are caught in an echo chamber created by your own biases and supported by the algorithms you surround yourself with. This is just sad man. So many people are getting poisoned by social media. You might want to try logging out of your accounts for a while and see if the world gets a bit better for you.

Objectively Clarence Thomas is a goon and should be impeached for judicial ethics violations.
You really want me to post on here some of the left-wing racist tweets?
 
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.
I actually had someone argue with me that the Supreme Court should have upheld abortion because ~70% of Americans thought they should.

That is absolutely the WRONG reason for the SC to do ANYTHING. I'm no legal scholar so maybe they were right and maybe they were wrong (but one must remember that they must make their decision within the framework of the arguments brought before them) but popular opinion is NOT a good reason.

In other words, they can only decide if the arguments presented them are valid. NOT if the overall issue should be one way or the other.

But too often the Judicial branch gets blamed for not doing the Legislative branch's job for them.
 
Last edited:

Dems ripping Clarence Thomas for nondisclosure mum on Biden judges who may have same problem​

Just The News found that nearly two dozen Biden-appointed judges also left the reimbursement sections blank on their official disclosure forms.



By Nick Givas
Updated: April 12, 2023 - 11:03pm
Democrats pillorying Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas for not disclosing paid vacations with political donor friends remained mum when pressed by Just The News about the nearly two dozen Biden-appointed judges who also left the reimbursement sections blank on their official disclosure forms.
A Just The News review of the Biden appointees' disclosure forms found that not only did many leave their reimbursement sections blank, but almost none of them had any "gifts" to disclose.
This alone does not prove wrongdoing, however when asked if these judges were being looked into as well, the White House, the Senate Judiciary Committee and the office of its chairman, Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) had no response.
An article published last week by ProPublica outlined trips Thomas had taken with GOP meagdonor Harlan Crow, one of which included travel on a chartered plane and yacht valued at over $500,000.
"[Thomas] flies on Crow's Bombardier Global 5000 jet," the outlet reported. "He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow's sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks."
The story triggered a letter from Durbin and Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee to Chief Justice John Roberts on Monday, asking for Thomas to be investigated internally.
"The Senate Judiciary Committee, which has legislative jurisdiction over Federal courts and judges, has a role to play in ensuring that the nation's highest court does not have the federal judiciary's lowest ethical standards," the letter read. "You have a role to play as well, both in investigating how such conduct could take place at the Court under your watch, and in ensuring that such conduct does not happen again. We urge you to immediately open such an investigation and take all needed action to prevent further misconduct."
The committee also promised to "hold a hearing" centered on restoring "confidence" in SCOTUS' ethical standards and even threatened to pass new legislation if Roberts opted not to investigate.
"You do not need to wait for Congress to act to undertake your own investigation into the reported conduct and to ensure that it cannot happen again," the Democratic lawmakers wrote. "We urge you to do so."
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) took things a step further, calling for Thomas' impeachment and accusing the Roberts court of human rights violations in a tweet last week.
"This is beyond party or partisanship," she wrote. "This degree of corruption is shocking — almost cartoonish. Thomas must be impeached. Barring some dramatic change, this is what the Roberts court will be known for: rank corruption, erosion of democracy, and the stripping of human rights."


The political fallout from the story caused Thomas to issue a rare public response, in which he defended his actions, stating he was in the right after seeking counsel from other court members. He pointed out that the people he was vacationing with were close personal friends and had no business before the high court.
"Harlan and Kathy Crow are among our dearest friends, and we have been friends for over twenty-five years," the statement read. "As friends do, we have joined them on a number of family trips during the more than quarter century we have known them. Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable. I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.
"These guidelines are now being changed, as the committee of the Judicial Conference responsible for financial disclosure for the entire federal judiciary just this past month announced new guidance. And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future."
Legal commentator and chair of Public Interest Law at George Washington University Jonathan Turley dismissed the allegations against Thomas on Twitter last week, writing: "We can debate the need for a code of ethics that apply to the justices, but there was no clear reporting obligation under judicial ethics for Thomas in such matters of 'personal hospitality.'"
 

Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor Didn’t Recuse Herself From Penguin Books Case, Despite Receiving $3 Million From the Publisher

Billionaire Harlan Crow paid school tuition for Justice Thomas' grandnephew, report says​

 
  • Like
Reactions: firegiver

Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor Didn’t Recuse Herself From Penguin Books Case, Despite Receiving $3 Million From the Publisher
Hahahahahahaha


**** me.

You really are this ****ing dumb.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DW4_2016

Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor Didn’t Recuse Herself From Penguin Books Case, Despite Receiving $3 Million From the Publisher

The implication that this is wrong, while you've defended Thomas is easily one of the ****ing stupidest things youve ever said.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dpic73


Well, I'm getting what you are saying. And looking at the big picture here, there seems a need for some ethics rules here.

BUT don't you think that this guy "paying" Thomas to be ultra conservative would be like Soros "paying" AOC to vote liberal in congress?

It would seem to me that this could easily be a case of birds of a feather being friends. Again, I can see the conflict of interest here and it's a bad look for sure.
 
Well, I'm getting what you are saying. And looking at the big picture here, there seems a need for some ethics rules here.

BUT don't you think that this guy "paying" Thomas to be ultra conservative would be like Soros "paying" AOC to vote liberal in congress?

It would seem to me that this could easily be a case of birds of a feather being friends. Again, I can see the conflict of interest here and it's a bad look for sure.
Aoc or any congress person isn't a life time appointment. So yeah it's different. Especially in the wake of Robert's denial for investigation. I seem to remember something about checks and balances. The system has become fully corrupt. Justices on the Supreme Court are supposed to be impartial interpreters of our living constitution. Not partisan hacks.
 
Aoc or any congress person isn't a life time appointment. So yeah it's different. Especially in the wake of Robert's denial for investigation. I seem to remember something about checks and balances. The system has become fully corrupt. Justices on the Supreme Court are supposed to be impartial interpreters of our living constitution. Not partisan hacks.

Living constitution? What does that mean?
 


You know, this seems like one of those situations where all those "DRAIN THE SWAMP!" troglodytes that post on here should be up in arms and raising hell about Thomas (and other SC justices.)

It's not surprising they aren't, because they don't actually care about that stuff. They just like to whinge and cry about the left because they're simpletons who are fully invested in political tribalism.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT