Omnibus Corrupt SCOTUS Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know!! Let’s impeach all but the democrats and fill the entire SC with democrats because that’s the goal here. I don’t think y’all know how transparent and gullible you all are.

Merrick Garland.

How do you get more transparent than Mitch McConnell allowing the Merrick Garland confirmation vote?

Look at him as AG - corrupt and partisan as all get out. We dodged a bullet with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We see you for what you are, Democrats.

https://twitter.com/AGHamilton29/status/1652051928040308737
Among the SCOTUS-related stories that major outlets have broken in the last few weeks:

- Washington Post discovered that Clarence Thomas has been declaring income from "Ginger Holdings LLC" instead of "Ginger Limited Partnership" since 2006.

- CNN discovered that a company Harlan Crow's family had a minority interest in was involved in a case that SCOTUS declined to consider. Crow & his company had no involvement in the case.

- Politico discovered that Justice Gorsuch correctly declared the sale of his portion of an LLC that sold property to a partner at a law firm. That partner never met Gorsuch and is a big Dem donor.

- Business Insider discovered that Justice Roberts' wife is a successful recruiter for major law firms. None of her recruits have ever argued before SCOTUS.

If you don't realize this is an intentional and coordinated campaign aimed directly at delegitimizing the SCOTUS majority, I don't know what to tell you.

You see Democrats for what they are? So you mean, demanding an ethical SCOTUS? I support that.

Democrats aren't the ones delegitimizing the SCOTUS majority, the SCOTUS majority is doing that THEMSELVES. Wake the F up.

Yeah. You are.
With ridiculous hit pieces and false charges.
Your rhetoric and your false accusations are going to prompt another LWNJ to try to assassinate one of them.

Sorry but just because you don't like hearing something doesn't automatically make it false. Reality does not revolve around your personal beliefs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know!! Let’s impeach all but the democrats and fill the entire SC with democrats because that’s the goal here. I don’t think y’all know how transparent and gullible you all are.

Merrick Garland.

How do you get more transparent than Mitch McConnell allowing the Merrick Garland confirmation vote?

Look at him as AG - corrupt and partisan as all get out. We dodged a bullet with him.

What corruption? And, partisan my ass. He's been moving glacially slow on glaring GOP corruption and there's still a ton more that he hasn't even touched.

[Anonymous]

She disclosed it, Thomas didn't. See the difference?

[Anonymous]

I have an idea.

Have the Department of Justice raise the following questions to the Supreme Court as part of a case:

Due to the special position of trust the Supreme Court occupies:
Must the Supreme Court follow Ethics Laws?
Must the Supreme Court abide by a Code of Conduct?
Must the Supreme Court maintain the appearance of propriety?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know!! Let’s impeach all but the democrats and fill the entire SC with democrats because that’s the goal here. I don’t think y’all know how transparent and gullible you all are.

Point out the ethics lapses and corruption of "left" justices and we can talk.

Please. I can actually predict the next ‘scandal’. Same sources, same BS.

The charges against thomas aren’t BS. Because you’re a wing nut, you get to essentially wish them away, but they’re real.

DP. I would argue it is YOU who is the wing nut, and as such, you get to keep obsessing over what has already been proven to NOT be ethics violations. The rules have now changed, and Thomas will change the way he reports personal hospitality from friends. Grow up and move on.

The Supreme Court justice, who is currently the longest serving justice on the high court, went on to explain in the statement that he sought guidance early in his tenure about the gifts and “was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable,” adding that he has “always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines.”

Justices file financial disclosure forms annually, which include requirements for the disclosure of certain gifts received. But rules about disclosing travel under the category of “personal hospitality” were reportedly not clearly outlined.

In his statement, Thomas noted that the disclosure guidelines are being changed, with new guidance adopted last month by the Judicial Conference of the United States, which includes a requirement to disclose some free trips and air travel. He added that he intends to follow that guidance in the future.
https://www.usnews.com/news/national-news/articles/2023-04-07/justice-thomas-says-he-was-advised-that-personal-hospitality-from-friends-was-not-reportable

Any Judge who thought it was okay to receive gifts of several hundred thousand dollars over decades is frankly clueless and unlikely to be a competent. This lawyer would never that person. Lacks all self awareness.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know!! Let’s impeach all but the democrats and fill the entire SC with democrats because that’s the goal here. I don’t think y’all know how transparent and gullible you all are.

Merrick Garland.

How do you get more transparent than Mitch McConnell allowing the Merrick Garland confirmation vote?

Look at him as AG - corrupt and partisan as all get out. We dodged a bullet with him.

Lets get real. The AG is a political appointment. A Supreme Court Justice is supposed to be above politics and free of political bias.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I know!! Let’s impeach all but the democrats and fill the entire SC with democrats because that’s the goal here. I don’t think y’all know how transparent and gullible you all are.

Merrick Garland.

How do you get more transparent than Mitch McConnell allowing the Merrick Garland confirmation vote?

Look at him as AG - corrupt and partisan as all get out. We dodged a bullet with him.

That’s true. He’s extremely partisan.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yet another "hit and a miss."

STATEMENT OF MARK PAOLETTA, FRIEND OF JUSTICE THOMAS

The Thomases have rarely spoken publicly about the remarkably generous efforts to help a child in need. They have always respected the privacy of this young man and his family. It is disappointing and painful, but unsurprising that some journalists and critics cannot do the same.

The Thomases—quietly and honorably—devoted twelve years of their lives to helping a beloved child in desperate need of love, support, and guidance. In 1997, Justice Thomas and his wife brought their great nephew to live with them. They agreed to take in this young child much as Justice Thomas’s grandparents had done for him and his brother in 1955. Justice Thomas’s grandparents changed the trajectory of his life, and the Thomases hoped to do the same for a child in need.

Justice Thomas and his wife made immeasurable personal and financial sacrifices and poured every ounce of their lives and hearts into giving their great nephew a chance to succeed. In the summer of 2006, the Thomases were struggling to find a school where they could send their great nephew. In discussing these challenges with their dear friends, Harlan and Kathy Crow, Harlan recommended that the Thomases consider one more option: sending their great nephew to Randolph Macon Academy. Harlan had attended Randolph Macon, and he thought the school would be a good fit.

Harlan had financially supported Randolph Macon since the 1980s, and funded scholarships for students from disadvantaged backgrounds. Harlan offered to pay the first year of Justice Thomas’s great nephew’s tuition in 2006, and that payment went directly to the school. Harlan Crow’s Office confirmed that he did not pay the great nephew’s tuition for any other year at Randolph Macon.

After some time, Randolph Macon recommended the great nephew attend a boarding school in Georgia for one year. Harlan offered to pay the first year of tuition for their great nephew at the Georgia school, and again, those tuition payments went directly to the school.

By the next school year (2009), the Thomases’ great nephew returned to Randolph Macon. He moved back to Savannah in December 2009, after he turned 18. The Thomases love their great nephew. It is despicable that the press has dragged him into their effort to smear Justice Thomas.

This story is another attempt to manufacture a scandal about Justice Thomas. But let’s be clear about what is supposedly scandalous now: Justice Thomas and his wife devoted twelve years of their lives to taking in and caring for a beloved child—who was not their own—just as Justice Thomas’s grandparents had done for him. They made many personal and financial sacrifices to do this. And along the way, their friends joined them in doing everything possible to give this child a future.

Harlan Crow’s tuition payments made directly to these schools on behalf of Justice Thomas’s great nephew did not constitute a reportable gift. Justice Thomas was not required to disclose the tuition payments made directly to Randolph Macon and the Georgia school on behalf of his great nephew because the definition of a “dependent child” under the Ethics in Government Act (5 U.S.C. 13101 (2)) does not include a “great nephew.” It is limited to a “son, daughter, stepson or stepdaughter.” Justice Thomas never asked Harlan Crow to pay for his great nephew’s tuition. And neither Harlan Crow, nor his company, had any business before the Supreme Court.

This malicious story shows nothing except for the fact that the Thomases and the Crows are kind, generous, and loving people who tried to help this young man.

[Anonymous]

That Thomas doesn't see a problem with Crow paying for private school tuition for his family member shows that he is irredeemable. He is so corrupt he can't even see it anymore.

[Anonymous]

This is unreported taxable income, no matter how much the oligarchs want to try to spin it.

[Anonymous]

It is worth noting that a *non-billionaire* friend gave Thomas $5,000 for this kid's education.

Thomas *did* report that gift.

So why did he report the $5,000 gift but not the billionaire Crow $150,000+ contributions at the same time?

Thomas hasn't answered that either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is worth noting that a *non-billionaire* friend gave Thomas $5,000 for this kid's education.

Thomas *did* report that gift.

So why did he report the $5,000 gift but not the billionaire Crow $150,000+ contributions at the same time?

Thomas hasn't answered that either.

Interesting.

It is shocking CT and his apologists are playing the victim and can’t see how inappropriate it is for him to accept so much largesse from a highly biased billionaire he met after becoming a SCJ without at least declaring all the different gifts.

Why doesn’t the SC care about the appearance of allowing themselves to be bought for influence?

A binding code of ethics is the very least the SC should be willing to do to restore public confidence in their moral authority.