Clarence Thomas

S

Shiftless2

Well-known member
It's beginning to look like he deserves his own thread ....



ldIUAmI.png


ProPublica said the current count is on the low end because they left ouy stuff that wasn't absolutely totally confirmed. Gifts from billionaires... 38 destination vacations 26 private jet flights 8 helicopter trips 12 VIP passes to sporting events, 2 stays at luxury resorts in Florida & Jamaica 1 standing invite to an uber-exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic None of this reported taxes.

"Clarence Thomas’ 38 Vacations: The Other Billionaires Who Have Treated the Supreme Court Justice to Luxury Travel" https://www.propublica.org/article/...ionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court

Vs7ZwHp.jpeg


https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/10/poli...ifts-hospitality-propublica-report/index.html

The more Propublica digs, the more they find gifts, favors, and special consideration given to Dirty Justice Thomas.

The RV pictured above cost $267,000. It was paid for by a billionaire. He says he "helped" pay for it and that he gave Thomas a "loan" that was "satisfied". However, he refuses to discuss the terms of the loan or whether it was actually paid off or forgiven.

Thomas won't comment on any of these illegal contributions
 
At some point the story ceases to be purely about Associate Justice Thomas. Does Chief Justice Roberts not know it's called the "Roberts court"?

There are ethics standards in lower court. Roberts wants to pretend we don't know the lower courts have them, and our Supreme Court, Robert's Supreme Court does not?
"All honors wounds are self-inflicted." industrialist Andrew Carnegie, (born November 25, 1835, Dunfermline, Fife, Scotland—died August 11, 1919, Lenox, Massachusetts, U.S.) - source: Britannica.com
Click to expand...
 
Rev. Dr. #4
Click to expand...
... AND !! A looker !

<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Seems to me SCOTUS' excuse here to fore for not having the same ethics standards subordinate justices are subject to was that at SCOTUS level, they're adult enough to not need it. Then
Clarence Thomas evaded the "high tech lynching" and joined the club.

Seems to me the Republicans are hoping it'll all blow over.

I see no shame in having ethics standards in any organization I'd belong to. The shame would be in failing to meet reasonable standards. Thus:

Shame !
 
I remember when President GHWB nominated Clarence Thomas. Thomas was so on edge even on camera Thomas was unable to suppress emotion-driven sub-lingual vocalizations.
It was as if to acknowledge Thomas himself did not deem himself worthy.
Then the on-camera "high-tech lynching" comment, shortly before Thomas was sworn in.

In generations past the U.S. proceeded on the premise that unlike their subordinates within our judiciary these SCOTUS ostensible exemplary Americans didn't need an ethics code. Then Thomas.
And who would author the SCOTUS ethics standard? - surprise -
SCOTUS would.
Seems to me if they wanted to be above criticism they could hand the drafting of such new legal standard to one or more law schools, and see what the students and law professors could come up with.

Appointing the fox hen-house security chief does not flatter any of those party to it, including, you know, ... SCOTUS. If they could be trusted to ethically form their own ethics standards, would they need such a standard?
 
Alright you guys. Seems to me a BBS displaying lock-step ideology (regardless of which side of the aisle), is dull.

Aristotle said opposition is the path to truth.
William James corroborated that by reminding us the answers we obtain are determined by the questions we ask.
"A prudent question is one half of wisdom." William James
Click to expand...
So like a good little admin. I yahoo'd Clarence, for an update, for counterpoint. This is what I found:

Clarence Thomas Renews Call for Reconsideration of Landmark Libel Ruling​

The justice wrote that the decision, New York Times v. Sullivan, lets news organizations “cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity.’”

By Adam Liptak / Reporting from Washington / Oct. 10, 2023
Justice Clarence Thomas renewed his call on Tuesday for the Supreme Court to reconsider New York Times v. Sullivan, the landmark 1964 ruling interpreting the First Amendment to make it more difficult for public officials to prevail in libel suits.
Justice Thomas wrote that the decision had no basis in the Constitution as it was understood by the people who drafted and ratified it. He added, quoting an earlier opinion, that it “comes at a heavy cost, allowing media organizations and interest groups ‘to cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity.’”
Justice Thomas has been the subject of a series of news reports raising questions about whether he had violated ethics rules. The reports said he had failed to disclose gifts and trips from Harlan Crow, a Texas billionaire who has donated to conservative causes.
The Sullivan decision and ones that followed it require public figures suing for defamation to prove that the defendant had acted with “actual malice.” The phrase is a legal term of art and does not connote the ordinary meaning of malice in the sense of spite or ill will.

www.nytimes.com

Clarence Thomas Renews Call for Reconsideration of Landmark Libel Ruling

The justice wrote that the decision, New York Times v. Sullivan, lets news organizations “cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity.’”
www.nytimes.com www.nytimes.com

Crooked?
Seems so.
BUT:
It's the swing vote that determines the election outcome. How many major U.S. policy decisions in law have been decided by SCOTUS 5:4 ?
 
Methinks the man doth protesteth too much ...

The actual quote is "'The lady doth protest too much, methinks." and it's from Hamlet (1604). Or I could have said that "Every accusation is a confession."
 
Uncle Clarence strikes again ....

7vbZMSp.jpeg


Is opinion was given in a case concerning racial gerrymandering in voter districts in South Carolina. They voted 6-3 to allow the local GQP keep their racial gerrymandering.

And not only did the 6 scumbags decide that racial gerrymandering is ok if done purely for partisan reasons, Clarence stepped up to say that states should be allowed to racially segregate in education if they wanted to.

All this comes as it’s reviled that his partner in slime Sam Alito has been flying insurrectionist flags outside his homes in sympathy of Trump and the Jan 6 mob, during cases concerning them that he refused to recluse himself from. And not forgetting also that Clarence’s wife was also in on that insurrection.

This can’t go on any more. Something’s got to give.

Also be prepared for a load of right wing deflection, gaslighting and gloating about this.
 
The highest law court in the land
with the lowest ethical standards (if any at all).

I does look more and more like if Thomas didn't have "justice" in his title, he'd have no justice at all. The justice is in?
 
Shiftless2 said:
"$4,000,000 Thomas" #13
Click to expand...

“Ah, Houston, we’ve had a problem.”
"If he who breaks the law is not punished, he who obeys it is cheated. This, and this alone, is why lawbreakers ought to be punished: to authenticate as good, and to encourage as useful, law-abiding behavior. The aim of criminal law cannot be correction or deterrence; it can only be the maintenance of the legal order." Thomas Szasz (b. 1920), U.S. psychiatrist. The Second Sin, "Punishment" (1973)
Click to expand...
The metaphorical cliché is "One bad apple spoils the barrel."

If Thomas continues to evade propriety, how long will it be before the others follow his example?

A quick glance at the graph suggests it's mostly Republican justices that are for $sale. - OR -
They're merely more expensive than their Dem. counterparts.
 

Justice Clarence Thomas formally reports trip to Bali paid for by conservative donor​


From the article, Alito doesn't appear blameless either.

On an only somewhat related note, I do know that at least some politicians do get rides on private jets (corporate or otherwise) and get around reporting issues because the owner of the jet charges them the equivalent of full first class airfare.
 
In commerce if we don't wish to patronize the bakery that discriminates we are free to conduct our $bidness with the one that doesn't.

With SCOTUS we don't have that luxury. And as a result we have both right and legal necessity to hold our SCOTUS justices to a higher standard.

The inmates have overtaken the asylum.

Justice Thomas:
your vote on our high court still counts.
But history will remember you for this long after you have assumed ambient temperature.
 

Justice Alito Caught on Tape Discussing How Battle for America ‘Can’t Be Compromised’​

In a new, secret recording, the Supreme Court justice says he “agrees” that the U.S. should return to a place of godliness
TESSA STUART, TIM DICKINSON

Justice Samuel Alito spoke candidly about the ideological battle between the left and the right — discussing the difficulty of living “peacefully” with ideological opponents in the face of “fundamental” differences that “can’t be compromised.” He endorsed what his interlocutor described as a necessary fight to “return our country to a place of godliness.” And Alito offered a blunt assessment of how America’s polarization will ultimately be resolved: “One side or the other is going to win.”

Alito made these remarks in conversation at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual dinner on June 3, a function that is known to right-wing activists as an opportunity to buttonhole Supreme Court justices. His comments were recorded by Lauren Windsor, a liberal documentary filmmaker. Windsor attended the dinner as a dues-paying member of the society under her real name, along with a colleague. She asked questions of the justice as ...

CONTINUED
 

Rotten to the core. The few decent judges remaining must be heartbroken about the way their Institution has fallen.​

AOPQHEm.png


The once august court, which the public held in highest esteem, is now hopelessly corroded: It is in the hands of a cabal of religious and far-right zealots, including a couple of ethical scofflaws with MAGA wives.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/04/...unlocked_article_code=1.yk0.jjLv.RxGHn5ZK_MwD

IAs i you ever needed a reason to vote blue in every election between now and the end of the universe ....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top