chazzed said:

---

Look, if Trump's/MAGA's hostile takeover of the GOP and posters more eloquent than I am haven't convinced you to stop providing cover for the GOP at every turn, then I probably won't be the straw that breaks the camel's back. I hope you end up making peace with your current position, because you're smack dab on the wrong side of history.

---

If you say Trump enough times you must be right, Mr.. 20 dollar man. Like I actually said, when you come out with this BS you undercut what are more serious allegations against Thomas. Didn't mention Trump once. Didn't excuse any Justices. Actually said Thomas faces serious allegations, which by the way did not violate existing reporting requirements.

Not everyone listens to people saying Trump, Trump, Trump as a knee jerk response. They see $20 dollars for a reunion diner and think the guys complaining are full of sheet. When you refuse to recognize that liberal Justices are at the trough, and call it false equivalency, you get called a hypocrite. You get wonderful congressional hearings on the Court that go tits-up on you. I mean when all 9 Justices tell you to eat sheet you gotta wonder why this challenge to the conservative Supreme Court judges is going off the rails. Maybe all 9 of the Justices are just fine with the way things are for the same reasons. For example, Sotomayor wants her book residuals, junkets, speech honorariums from the ACLU, and the like and doesn't want to face an impeachment move from the right wing. Just like the guys on the right. don't want to be impeached by the left. Like you said, must be a false equivalency, those three liberal Justices just must not have known what they were doing?

I have not heard one response from the liberals here to the ACLU's efforts to get liberal judges justices appointed, other than they don't do that (well they actually say they do that now). Do we not mention them because they have been less successful than the Heritage folks, or maybe we can make a fast equivalency argument, or say they are on the right side of history, or Trump, Trump, Trump? I'm sure one of you guys are going to say but the Court's ratings are down, well guess what, so are the ratings for the other two branches of the government. I voted for Biden, but the more I see, the more I wonder if no one is on the right side of history.

Interesting that the polls show no drop in views of the Court over the last year. Basically, this is just to say that no opinion has changed in the past year the views on the Supreme Court , nor has the one-sided allegations against the conservative justices moved the needle. It took a historic jump down after the Dobbs decision with women, and it hasn't come back up or gone down. This suggesst recent criticisms were more the result of disagreement with the jurisprudence of the new conservative majority than any particular label of misconduct.

bearister said:

---

I'd be interested in a review and comparison of the dollar value of items omitted by liberal Justices of the SCOTUS on their financial disclosures vs that omitted by Conservative Justices.
The dollar differential to be donated by the Justices with the bigger number to St. Anthony's Dining Room in SF.

---

Doesn't seem fair, Thomas has had a lot more law clerks than Justice Jackson.

Clarence Thomas's $267,230 R.V. and the Friend Who Financed It DNyuz


https://dnyuz.com/2023/08/05/clarence-thomass-267230-r-v-and-the-friend-who-financed-it/

bearister said:

---

Clarence Thomas's $267,230 R.V. and the Friend Who Financed It DNyuz


https://dnyuz.com/2023/08/05/clarence-thomass-267230-r-v-and-the-friend-who-financed-it/

---

Free NYT link.

NYT finds Thomas got his RV through the largesse of a wealthy patron and didn’t disclose it. 🎁 https://t.co/Q0OpeBY49F

— southpaw (@nycsouthpaw) August 5, 2023

GoOskie said:

---

Biden family HAS to be involved with this SOMEHOW!

/sarcasm in case the smoothies take it seriously

---

NO but they have their own corruption that need to be acknowledged.

Why don't we agree that corruption is destructive and that we will not just focus on those on the other side but will be honest and principled about even those on our side?

I don't like Thomas and it is looking unscrupulous.

bearister said:

---

I'd be interested in a review and comparison of the dollar value of items omitted by liberal Justices of the SCOTUS on their financial disclosures vs that omitted by Conservative Justices.
The dollar differential to be donated by the Justices with the bigger number to St. Anthony's Dining Room in SF.

---

What amount of corruption is acceptable (even if aligned with the liberal viewpoint) and what amount is not?

Just checking to make sure we are not moving this based on convenience.

bearister said:

---

I'm not a liberal.* Ask Yogi. No level of corruption is acceptable. Pass an ethical code of conduct for the SCOTUS. The problem with doing that is that Republicans know they can't shove their agenda down the throats of decent Americans unless they put bought and paid for wh@res on the Court (like Thomas, Alito and the late Scalia) to rubber stamp their legislation and court decisions…..and bought and paid for wh@res like the finer things in life so you have to keep'em in sugar if you gonna keep gettin' their love.

" WASHINGTON, July 20 (Reuters) - U.S. Senate Democrats on Thursday advanced a bill that would mandate a binding ethics code for the Supreme Court after revelations that some conservative justices failed to disclose luxury trips and real estate transactions, though Republican opposition means it has little chance of becoming law.

The Democratic-led Senate Judiciary Committee voted 11-10 along party lines to approve the legislation, which would impose on the top U.S. judicial body new requirements for financial disclosures and for recusal from cases in which a justice may have a conflict of interest."

Democratic-backed US Supreme Court ethics bill passed by Senate panel | Reuters


https://www.reuters.com/world/us/senate-panel-set-vote-us-supreme-court-ethics-reform-2023-07-20/

*In this forum (and on Fox News) if you are not a tRumpist or tRumpist apologist then you are deemed a Leftist/Progressive/Liberal.

What level of Republicans stonewalling instead of doing the right thing is acceptable? Just checking.

---

Not that it matters, but I would approve this without modification and would ensure it is applied evenly without consideration for political party or disposition.

This isn't strictly about Thomas (although it does talk about payments to Ginni), but I wasn't sure which of the SCOTUS dumpster fire threads to post this to.

Bill Britt (Alabama Political Reporter) out with an article blasting right wing dark money operations in relation to the voting rights case in which Alabama is openly defying SCOTUS. A lot of people have been talking about this but this is the first "explanation" I've seen. I don't know how much of this article is true - it reads somewhat like a Qanon or anti-Soros RWNJ hit piece - but Britt is fairly credible and this all sounds consistent with other things we've seen about Leonard Leo and his operations.

Quote:

---

APR has now identified connections between Alabama officials who led the 2023 redistricting process which disregarded the U.S. Supreme Court's order with far-right power broker Leonard Leo's dark money network, described this past week by Politico as "a billion-dollar force that has helped remake the judiciary and overturn longstanding legal precedents on abortion, affirmative action and many other issues."

APR's reporting shows the extent to which Alabama's calculation to defy the Supreme Court was made not simply by state legislators in Alabama but has been driven by nationally connected political operatives at the center of the well-documented right-wing effort to reshape the composition and jurisprudence of the Supreme Court and to overturn the remaining key protections established by the 1965 Voting Rights Act.

---

https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZPR7NTtgH/

A very succinct take on Clarence

bearister said:

---

Clarence Thomas Secretly Participated in Koch Network Donor Events ProPublica


https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-secretly-attended-koch-brothers-donor-events-scotus

*Why did he even bother keeping it secret. Everyone knows he is bought and paid for. He should flaunt it, look his detractors straight in the eye and say, "What, exactly, do you think you can do about it?"

---

Another day. Another Clarence Thomas ethics scandal.

On top of what I covered in this video, today we learned that Thomas secretly participated in fundraising events for the Koch network — which regularly has cases before SCOTUS.

How does Clarence Thomas still have his job? pic.twitter.com/bSFZWtiYOS

— Robert Reich (@RBReich) September 22, 2023

Who says applying heat doesn't help?

BREAKING: The Supreme Court has *denied* John Eastman's effort to vacate the court rulings that resulted in his emails going to the Jan. 6 select committee.

Most notable? Clarence Thomas (the subject of some key Eastman emails) recused. pic.twitter.com/lXPYrIvQNt

— Kyle Cheney (@kyledcheney) October 2, 2023

*Has he ever recused himself before? If you shine a light behind the fridge, the cockroaches come scampering out.

He is little more than a bought and paid for garden variety crook.

Clarence Thomas failed to fully repay $267,000 loan for luxury RV, inquiry finds


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/oct/25/clarence-thomas-anthony-welters-luxury-rv-loan-forgiven?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Unit2Sucks said:

---

I think it's time that we all acknowledge that the faith the framers had in the impartiality of the Supreme Court no longer flies. At this point, we may as well have kings, I mean presidents, appointing their family members to the bench.

---

Not many things are funnier to me than Biden voters showing concern about the corrupting influence of money in politics, but only when it's about Clarence Thomas.

One of those things however is watching you get your panties in a twist about the U.S. losing its proxy war with Russia. That never stops being funny. Ever.

1/@SenWarren, I trust you also want to investigate taxes of billionaire David Rubenstein, who let @POTUS Biden & extended family stay for free at his $20 million Nantucket estate in 2014 & 2021? He also allowed Justice Breyer to use his plane to go to wedding on Nantucket. https://t.co/mIpfONklRN

— Mark Paoletta (@MarkPaoletta) July 20, 2023

2/And I trust you want to include in this tax investigation all mansion owners who allowed @POTUS Biden & family to stay for free, including owner who allowed Biden/family to stay SIX times at his St. Croix mansion, which Biden has never disclosed.https://t.co/gmQN6EZSfR

— Mark Paoletta (@MarkPaoletta) July 20, 2023

"Ruth Bader Ginsburg disclosed more trips than any other justice in 2018. During a trip to Israel, she was a guest of the Israeli billionaire Morris Kahn; the year before, the court had given his company a victory by declining to take up a case." https://t.co/sN21VNYdBX

— Matt Stoller (@matthewstoller) July 9, 2023

But tell me more about how Clarence Thomas is unique

Because he married to Cray Cray Lady.


aka The Drunk Phone Caller

They put the coup in couple
https://www.threads.net/@sboyer74/post/C1OHJ54uW0t/?igshid=NTc4MTIwNjQ2YQ==

"I don't think anyone's trying to make the case…..SCOTUS justices appointed by Dems aren't corrupt…"

It would be fun to make the case by going line item by line item through the research of corruption of Thomas and Alito vs two Democratic appointed SCOTUS that someone here designates as the most corrupt.

Then do the same for these deceased Justices from each team: RBG vs Scalia

As a government employee at a less lofty level, I'm not allowed to receive gifts greater than $20. It hasn't been an issue though, except when the Saudis, Big Pharma or the Deep State take me to lunch.

cbbass1 said:

---

The branch of our Federal Government whose job it is to regulate SCOTUS & the Judicial Branch is Congress. It's their job to define what's legal & what isn't. And therein lies the problem. Members of Congress from both parties are also horribly corrupt, and struggle to maintain even the lowest level of ethical behavior amongst themselves. Note that they were unable to prohibit Insider Trading for their own enrichment.

This universal corruption will continue unless & until U.S. voters stop voting for corrupt candidates who represent their donors, and not We The People.

---

🚨BREAKING🚨

I have just released the full report on politicians trading in 2023.

Like every year since 2020, US politicians beat the market.

And many in Congress made unusually timed trades resulting in huge gains.

Here are the top performers of 2023. pic.twitter.com/ykf9VICsBw

— unusual_whales (@unusual_whales) January 2, 2024

wifeisafurd said:

---

bearister said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

oski003 said:

---

I flew on Southwest the other day. Tickets were about $300. The cost to charter the plane would have likely been astronomical, but the costs were shared by other passengers. Did Thomas actually receive $500,000 in value or was he part of a larger group of people vacationing on the jet and yacht? I am merely attacking the sensationalism of the writing. Clearly, this is something SC Justices should avoid.

---

You're just doing what you always do. Obfuscating the misdeeds of your tribe.

---

You want to go down this line of inquiry with Roberts, Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayer or Kagan, just to name a few?

Is it misdeeds if everyone does it?

---

I want you to go down that line of inquiry. Do some research and post the stories so we can read them. You don't think Republicans haven't spent millions trying turn up dirt on the people on your list?

Republicans spend countless hours in congressional hearings pursuing bridges to nowhere in their investigations of Democratic enemies (Hillary, Benghazi, etc.).

Democrats show up to hearings to testify and answer questions (provided they can concentrate long enough to focus on a weak question tacked onto the end of a posturing stump speech).

On the other hand, Republican witnesses dodge subpoenas, assert the 5th or just skip to the chase and plead guilty.

Scalia and Thomas were always so arrogant that they just did their thing in plain sight with an implied, "F@uck you, do something about it." Both bought and paid for by the Koch brothers and proud of it.

---

From 2004 to 2014, the nine justices took more than 1,000 reported trips paid for by business people, political activists, ideological organizations, or anyone with vested interests in the broad legal issues. Scalia was by far the most traveled, with more than 23 trips on average a year, followed by Justice Stephen Breyer, with 17. Most to the trips were not disclosed or not timely disclosed. For example, Breyer traveled to London, Luxembourg and Sun Valley in 2014 with lobbyist groups picking up the tab. USA Today 3/17/16. So an an implied, "F@uck you, do something about it" to you from Justice Breyer. Expect more of this every day. How about Ginsberg tomorrow? Blinders is one thing, being ignorant is another.

The rest of the garbage, such as about wasted congressional hearings, I give a big implied bi-partisan F/U.

---

So, you're saying the Supreme Court has always been one big boondoggle!
And a generalized F U.

Nice post!!