Shit I was questioning myself when a friend wanted to buy me a meal as a magistrate. Apparently that half time judicial gig was more important than SCOTUS
Clarence Thomas
- Thread starter Joes Place
- Start date
Looks like we need name and likeness legislation for SC Judges
So this guy is the brother of Justice Thomas’ billionaire friend.
Displaying nazi stuff is just weird.
My parents have a beautiful silver service set with swastikas on the bottom that they inherited from my grandmother, who’d bought them for cigarettes after the war.
It was never a big deal for my grandmother because my grandfather and all of his friends had served, and they were seen as normal war trophies. That’s not really the case anymore. I can’t imagine my parents ever displaying or using the stuff, and it’s much nicer than those linens.
Last edited:
That's how the statutes are written. You can go and look it up yourself.
Transportation, is NOT included as "hospitality".
I'm going to need a ruling here. Does this mean repubs can't throw out "Soros this, Soros that" anymore?
It was ALWAYS included as part of the statutes the ethics rules were based upon.
I have no issues holding CT accountable. However, let’s open up the rest of the justice’s finances including records of their vacations and how they were paid for. I hope the rest are squeaky clean.
None of them have "paid vacations" on private jets. Hell....Gorsuch even disclosed a fricking fishing rod gift.
Sunlight is the best disinfectant. Scalia literally died on one of these free trips.
Public confidence in the Supreme Court has plummeted in the last 20 years, and corruption like this will further erode confidence.
But, I do thank you for telling us you’re cool with it because he’s on your team. I work in the real world and I have far more strict rules as to what I can accept as a gift, and corrupting me doesn’t impact the lives of all Americans like corrupting Thomas does.
It sure as sh!t is. That threshold is incredibly low, for good reason.
Under the new rules, justices and other federal judges must report travel by private jet, as well as stays at commercial properties, such as hotels, resorts or hunting lodges.
The new regulations now require that judges disclose non-business stays at resorts, the use of private jets and instances when a third party reimburses a host for costs associated with a visit.
Gee, one would think if this was ALWAYS included it wouldn’t be part of the new rules that went into effect less than a month ago.
Justices Must Disclose Travel and Gifts Under New Rules
The change comes as members of Congress have called for the justices to be held to ethics standards similar to those for the executive and legislative branches.
New judiciary ethics rules close ‘loopholes’ to require more disclosure of private travel costs | CNN Politics
After pressure from members of Congress, the federal judiciary revised its financial disclosure rules to require that federal judges – including Supreme Court justices – to be more specific when disclosing non-business travel.
AGAIN: PREVIOUS standards for reporting on "hospitality" DID NOT INCLUDE free transportation.
Irrespective of any new guidance put in place.
Travel wasn't explicitly stated in the old statute that was after Watergate, so therefore you are being disingenuous with your statement. Go figure.
What real estate SC cases should Thomas recused himself from because of this? Please be specific. Why didn't RBG recuse herself when she officiated a same-sex wedding before the Obergefell decision that federally recognized gay marriage? Didn't see you fly off the handle about that....
"Hospitality" does not include "travel", period. Only "hospitality" was excluded from reporting.
Right, he didn’t break the rules. He just took millions in gifts in exchange for access. No problem there.Under the new rules, justices and other federal judges must report travel by private jet, as well as stays at commercial properties, such as hotels, resorts or hunting lodges.
The new regulations now require that judges disclose non-business stays at resorts, the use of private jets and instances when a third party reimburses a host for costs associated with a visit.
Gee, one would think if this was ALWAYS included it wouldn’t be part of the new rules that went into effect less than a month ago.
Justices Must Disclose Travel and Gifts Under New Rules
The change comes as members of Congress have called for the justices to be held to ethics standards similar to those for the executive and legislative branches.www.nytimes.com
New judiciary ethics rules close ‘loopholes’ to require more disclosure of private travel costs | CNN Politics
After pressure from members of Congress, the federal judiciary revised its financial disclosure rules to require that federal judges – including Supreme Court justices – to be more specific when disclosing non-business travel.amp.cnn.com
Hmmmm....can MAGAs do the "30-25 = x" math here?
Doubt it.
The left has been trying to target Clarence Thomas since his confirmation hearings. This is just the latest round of trying to model day lynch a black man that doesn't follow leftist ideology.
Doesn't matter that he didn't technically break any rules or laws. We hate him and therefore he is guilty. We will go after him and anyone close to him until we find the crime and then we will bang the drum until a lie becomes the truth.
If you don't think this happens look at how the left treated Caitlin Clark for daring to be good at basketball while white
Doesn't matter that he didn't technically break any rules or laws. We hate him and therefore he is guilty. We will go after him and anyone close to him until we find the crime and then we will bang the drum until a lie becomes the truth.
If you don't think this happens look at how the left treated Caitlin Clark for daring to be good at basketball while white
The argument is that he is as unethical of a jurist as we have seen in my lifetime. He doesn’t t even pretend to be unbiased or to attempt to rule cases by their constitutional merit. He is a partisan hack, and this behavior is part of the proof.
"Leftist ideology" is grifting $$ from rich people so you'll uphold laws they like?
Why aren't the leftist SC justices in on this gig?
Caitlin Clark played in a boys' league as a kid - something Iowa's GOP would outlaw today.
In other words he doesn't rule the way you would like him to.
Maybe he should check with you going forward on how to rule?
Care to.comment on your own racial bias?
What gig? Keep banging that drum just like the maoist you are
Maybe because they (and the other conservative justices) aren’t as disgracefully unethical as Thomas.
Self admittingly this guy isn't very ****ing smart. Congrats America!
