Clarence Thomas may soon be ousted

a reply to: StoutBroux

Ah , Supreme Court Justices are Appointed for LIFE . AOC is going to have to Kill him Herself..............

a reply to: network dude

Unless your friend is Epstein....then, hey, it's all good.

a reply to: StoutBroux

So, if you are a (conservative) judge, don't have any rich friends or you'll be attacked by AOC for the rich friends buying you gifts. But she can spend campaign money on her boyfriend with money donated to her by rich people.

Still though, bad is bad, but the hypocrisy is creating a stench that likely has already travelled outside of our own galaxy.

And another new development. Leonard Leo (Ginni Thomas' partner in founding the first PAC with money from Harlan Crow weeks before the Citizens United decision made PACs legal) in 2012 told a pollster to bill his non-profit tens of thousands of dollars and then use that money to pay Ginni Thomas. But he specifically made sure Ginni's name was never mentioned on any billing documents.

That same non-profit would then be involved in a landmark voting rights case that appeared before the Supreme Court later that year.

Fun fact: The name of that pollster? Kellyanne Conway.

BREAKING! 5.6.2023

Those who thought Clarence Thomas was in potential trouble, now look like the FOOLS THEY ARE.

Justice Thomas is Cleared: redstate.com... 5

a reply to: carewemust

What does a six year old article have to do with Clarence Thomas?

Black peole aren’t allowed to go on lavish trips? Oh sorry I’ll cancel all forthcoming plans

a reply to: Salamandy

It has nothing to do with going on the trips. It has to do with the fact that Thomas has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from prominent Republican donors that have had business before the court and he failed to both disclose the gifts and recuse himself from their cases.

Compare this situation to Justice Fortas who received $20,000 from a friend that also had business before the court. Even though Fortas returned the money and recused himself from his friend's case, he still ultimately resigned from the Court due to his actions damaging the integrity of the Court.

What Thomas has done is way more damaging to the Court's integrity.

Apparently a top aide for Thomas was Venmoed money from multiple lawyers that had business before the court. The aide is refusing to disclose what those payments were for.

A billionaire giving you gifts then having that used against you in the future. Yeah, that's not a setup at all.

originally posted by: SwissMarked
a reply to: StoutBroux


Yawn…

Second Line… 🤣

Democrats are desperate to get a justice appointed by Joe Biden.

Especially after critically ill Ruth bader Ginsburg selfishly refused to retire while Barack Obama was president.

originally posted by: Thrumbo

Whoa, hold up there bro.

You're saying something bad about a conservative, there was something negative about GOP. You came to the wrong forum.

Well if AOC says so I guess we get rid of him...lol

a reply to: v1rtu0s0

The billionaire funded the PAC founded by Thomas' wife, which of course was the first PAC in the country and was registered as an entity before the decision making PACs legal was made public.

This isn't some kind of honeypot.

YAWN!! The USSC makes rulings against the Liberal Socialists so they order their media lapdogs to scrape up anything that they can find to make the Court look bad. The fact that AOC wants him out is enough for me to want him to stay in.

Hell, some of their collateral damage is sticking to Sotomayor. Nothing like friendly fire.

originally posted by: Salamandy
Black peole aren’t allowed to go on lavish trips? Oh sorry I’ll cancel all forthcoming plans

So what is lavish? The word lavish is used in every post over and over, and that there tells much about the purpose of the pushed narrative. They are close friends, who cares...

Here is what Thomas said...

Thomas’ brief statement acknowledges joining Crow and his wife, who he described as among his “dearest friends,” on “a number of family trips” over the years. He also defended his failure to disclose 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,” Thomas said in the statement. “I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.”

What people are suggesting is that he broke the Ethics in Government Act, but there are exemptions where you do not need to disclose things over 415 dollars.

The exemption states that gifts of “food, lodging, or entertainment received as personal hospitality” don’t have to be disclosed. The law defines “personal hospitality” in a way that further limits the exception. It only applies to gifts received from an individual at that person’s home or at properties that they or their family own.

And that is exactly what people are suggesting he did. Everything that he and/or his wife did was owned by his friend Crow. Crow's house, getaways, boat, etc. were all personal property that Thomas/wife on and off over the years vacation at.

This is one personal friend, so it is not like he had a revolving door for people to "buy" his favor unlike others including the current President.

originally posted by: Threadbare

The billionaire funded the PAC founded by Thomas' wife, which of course was the first PAC in the country and was registered as an entity before the decision making PACs legal was made public.

This isn't some kind of honeypot.

He funded 500k to the PAC, and?

originally posted by: v1rtu0s0
A billionaire giving you gifts then having that used against you in the future. Yeah, that's not a setup at all.

Did that happen? The "gifts" were to visit each other, kind of like what close friends do.

Hey liberal hypocrites!!! Can we oust Sotomayor too? She seems way more corrupt!!!

Sotomayor's wealth has skyrocketed since joining Supreme Court, raising ethics concerns

Sonia Sotomayor's net worth has increased significantly since joining the nation's highest court, according to financial disclosure forms amid new revelations about the Supreme Court justice's efforts to promote her books.

In 2007, the sum of Sotomayor's total investments was between $50,001 and $115,000, according to her financial disclosure form for that year. She reported only two assets: a checking account and a savings account, both at Citibank.

In 2008, Sotomayor's financial disclosures show she had the same two assets, this time totaling $15,001 to $65,000. The following year, during which Sotomayor was both nominated and confirmed to the Supreme Court, she held the same investments for the same range of value.

Since then, Sotomayor's net worth has skyrocketed, putting her among the ranks of the nation's millionaires. In 2021, her investments totaled somewhere between $1.5 million and $6.4 million, according to financial disclosure forms. Last year, investments were roughly the same, in between $1.6 million and $6.6 million.

Sotomayor's yearly salary was about $180,000 as a federal appeals court judge before Obama nominated her, supplemented by about $25,000 a year from teaching at New York-area law schools. That salary went up several thousands of dollars upon becoming a Supreme Court justice.

Currently, members of the high court make $285,400 except for the chief justice, who earns just under $300,000.

Read more here

www.foxnews.com...

a reply to: StoutBroux

Why do you hate black people?

a reply to: StoutBroux

There is no mechanism to remove a justice other than impeachment, and a Republican congress will not impeach Thomas.

What is more likely to happen is that the scope of the journalism and the various exposés will expand to include more liberal justices, showing this corruption is not endemic to the conservative justices.

This will show a more wide spread corruption at the highest court and will push forward the calls for the SC reform of some sort. If it's all sides who are helping themselves, then some sort of new rules are in order, right?