No surprise - Clarence Thomas is completely corrupt

Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?


No, no one has to report gifts, only income.


Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf



I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.


Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.


does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.


You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.


this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.


No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.


The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.


Reminder again that federal employees cannot accept anything of more than $20 in value; and nothing to exceed $50 from a single source in a given year.

The same should apply to EVERYONE in federal government, to include elected officials, appointees and judges.


Actually, one would think that Judges (and particularly the Justices) should be bound by the toughest of ethics rules.


SCOTUS is a life time appointment. This is more in line with an imperial Royal appointment. There is no accountability. I am surprised there have been no calls for Thomas to resign. The dems are meekly calling for a very weak ethics reform to be done by the corrupt justices themselves. They have said no. Now the dems will backdown.

This is over. Thomas stays and the conservatives can now openly solicit money for rulings. Welcome to the new reality.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?


No, no one has to report gifts, only income.


Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf



I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.


Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.


does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.


You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.


this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.


No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.


The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.


Reminder again that federal employees cannot accept anything of more than $20 in value; and nothing to exceed $50 from a single source in a given year.

The same should apply to EVERYONE in federal government, to include elected officials, appointees and judges.


Actually, one would think that Judges (and particularly the Justices) should be bound by the toughest of ethics rules.


SCOTUS is a life time appointment. This is more in line with an imperial Royal appointment. There is no accountability. I am surprised there have been no calls for Thomas to resign. The dems are meekly calling for a very weak ethics reform to be done by the corrupt justices themselves. They have said no. Now the dems will backdown.

This is over. Thomas stays and the conservatives can now openly solicit money for rulings. Welcome to the new reality.

I am so effing sick of this hot take of blaming the Democrats for the failings of the GOP. Where are the calls among the GOP - allegedly so obsessed with honor and law abiding (lol) - for Thomas to resign?
Anonymous
🤔
Anonymous
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:

This is called buying yourself a little piece of mind! /s
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:For gifts of this size, wouldn't Thomas have to declare them on his income taxes?


No, no one has to report gifts, only income.


Not according to the attachment to the Roberts letter. They are supposed to disclose gifts, there just isn’t any penalty if they don’t.

The Statement on Ethics Principles and Practices signed by the nine Justices says they file the same disclosures as other Federal judges, disclosing “non-government income, investments, gifts, and reimbursements by third parties.” It also says that the disclosure guidance was amended in March to provide “clarification on the scope of the “personal hospitality” exception to the disclosure rules. It then says that the only enforcement mechanism for a failure to disclose is that the Committee on Financial Disclosure sends a letter to the Justice asking for a response.

So Thomas is supposed to disclose the patrons who are sponsoring him and his family but no one has any authority to do anything about it.

See paragraph 5 of the Statement:
https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Letter%20to%20Chairman%20Durbin%2004.25.2023.pdf



I think we are talking about 2 different "disclosings". One is reporting to congress, the other to the IRS. Maybe you can get away with not reporting to congress, but not reporting to the IRS can send you to jail.


Supreme Court Justices are above the law. You are sadly mistaken if you think DOJ will charge a conservatives justices with anything.


does the DOJ get involved in IRS matters? doesn't the IRS do it directly?

The amount Thomas received was large. I feel certain he had to declare it on his taxes and pay taxes on it.


You don’t pay taxes on gifts you receive. You’ve been told this a few times. But there are other tax issues that could come up for sure. Like fraud.


this cannot be true. Even with your own children, if you give them too much, they have to declare it on their taxes as income.


No, they don't. I'm not sure how many times you have to be told this. Gifts are not income. Here's the statute: https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/102#:~:text=Gross%20income%20does%20not%20include,bequest%2C%20devise%2C%20or%20inheritance.&text=where%20the%20gift%2C%20bequest%2C%20devise,the%20amount%20of%20such%20income.

There is a separate thing called the gift tax, but that tax is on the donor not the donee.


The line between a gift and a bribe is not far, and certainly not far at the levels provided to the Thomases. And presumably, we all want our Justices to be bound by the toughest of ethics rules, since their are supposed to be unbiased judges, free of day to day political influences. The FACT is that Thomas is fundamentally corrupt. The FACT is that our elected politicians and our civil servants face tougher rules.


Reminder again that federal employees cannot accept anything of more than $20 in value; and nothing to exceed $50 from a single source in a given year.

The same should apply to EVERYONE in federal government, to include elected officials, appointees and judges.


Actually, one would think that Judges (and particularly the Justices) should be bound by the toughest of ethics rules.


SCOTUS is a life time appointment. This is more in line with an imperial Royal appointment. There is no accountability. I am surprised there have been no calls for Thomas to resign. The dems are meekly calling for a very weak ethics reform to be done by the corrupt justices themselves. They have said no. Now the dems will backdown.

This is over. Thomas stays and the conservatives can now openly solicit money for rulings. Welcome to the new reality.

I am so effing sick of this hot take of blaming the Democrats for the failings of the GOP. Where are the calls among the GOP - allegedly so obsessed with honor and law abiding (lol) - for Thomas to resign?


Because everyone knows the republicans are criminals. No one expects anything else from them.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:🤔


Why must liberals pursue this baseless witch hunt! The man was practically PENNILESS as a mere Sup Ct justice - of COURSE he has to find a little scratch where he can, and you don't get tit without tat of course.
Anonymous
PBS aired an excellent documentary yesterday evening on Ginni and Clarence Thomas. Try to watch when it's repeated.
Anonymous
This just in: Quittin-Time Clarence and Three-Scoops Ginni love free stuff.

#HighTechLynching

Anonymous
The PBS documentary someone just mentioned can be watched on YouTube. It's nearly two hours long. My takeaway is that Justice Thomas has had a chip on his shoulder his entire life. We are all just living his revenge. And Ginni sounded very drunk when she called Anita Hill. I'm glad the answering machine recorded it.

I'm still wondering why they took his grandnephew from his mother at age six and the boy needed a boarding school for troubled youth by his teenaged years. What did they do to him, or is Ginni just not maternal? I know it's not germane to his corruption on the Supreme Court but I'm troubled about how they treated that child. He is over 21 now.

https://youtu.be/wJuRx1wARUk

Anonymous
No calls for Thomas to resign?
Anonymous
Don’t worry, we won’t know any more for a while. It’s time for an extension! It doesn’t matter because we should all just shut up and stop noticing the GOP “justices” squidgy relationship to the truth. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/06/07/supreme-court-justice-disclosures-clarence-thomas/
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:The PBS documentary someone just mentioned can be watched on YouTube. It's nearly two hours long. My takeaway is that Justice Thomas has had a chip on his shoulder his entire life. We are all just living his revenge. And Ginni sounded very drunk when she called Anita Hill. I'm glad the answering machine recorded it.

I'm still wondering why they took his grandnephew from his mother at age six and the boy needed a boarding school for troubled youth by his teenaged years. What did they do to him, or is Ginni just not maternal? I know it's not germane to his corruption on the Supreme Court but I'm troubled about how they treated that child. He is over 21 now.

https://youtu.be/wJuRx1wARUk



I listened to a Fresh Air segment about him this week. I don't usually play armchair psychologist, but I came away from it convinced he has complex PTSD (or something like it) and that explains A LOT of his choices.

I also agree that I think there should have been Dem calls for him to resign.
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:The PBS documentary someone just mentioned can be watched on YouTube. It's nearly two hours long. My takeaway is that Justice Thomas has had a chip on his shoulder his entire life. We are all just living his revenge. And Ginni sounded very drunk when she called Anita Hill. I'm glad the answering machine recorded it.

I'm still wondering why they took his grandnephew from his mother at age six and the boy needed a boarding school for troubled youth by his teenaged years. What did they do to him, or is Ginni just not maternal? I know it's not germane to his corruption on the Supreme Court but I'm troubled about how they treated that child. He is over 21 now.

https://youtu.be/wJuRx1wARUk



I listened to a Fresh Air segment about him this week. I don't usually play armchair psychologist, but I came away from it convinced he has complex PTSD (or something like it) and that explains A LOT of his choices.

I also agree that I think there should have been Dem calls for him to resign.

A whole bunch of Democrats have called for Thomas to resign.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/04/19/clarence-thomas-resign-supreme-court/11695763002/
Anonymous
Anonymous wrote:Harlan Crow paid private school tuition for Clarence Thomas’s kid.
https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

Crow also paid for Hidden Lake Academy, a residential therapeutic treatment center plagued by allegations of abuse, after he was expelled from Randolph-Macon.

Thomas’s grandnephew is talking.
https://newrepublic.com/post/182635/clarence-thomas-son-mark-martin-jail-relationship
post reply Forum Index » Political Discussion
Message Quick Reply
Go to: