Reply to No surprise - Clarence Thomas is completely corrupt

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "No surprise - Clarence Thomas is completely corrupt"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Maybe and Ginni are simply not smart enough to hold th positions they do

[twitter]https://twitter.com/FridaGhitis/status/1648275575516143618[/twitter][/quote]

Is lying on a federal form not a crime? [/quote]

That's no misunderstanding.

He committed a crime.[/quote]
So either he’s unfit because he’s a criminal or because he’s so stupid he doesn’t even know how to read.[/quote]

It’s worse.  With all he has going on financially, he needs an accountant and tax attorney/ attorney who specializes in this. Dude is on SCOTUS. This isn’t some shocker to him. He’s unfit either because he’s a criminal or because he’s so stupid that after multiple problems with his disclosure forms, he’s a lawyer who hasn’t hired an accountant/lawyer.  Even Trump used an accounting firm (Mazars).  That’s what puzzles me.  Hire a good lawyer.  Have them do your taxes and draft these forms for you to review. He’s getting millions in passive income. He can afford a law firm.  Who does his taxes and do they have the same mistakes?

This goes beyond “I’m too important to be bothered to do the form right”.  It’s “I’m too important to be bothered to hire someone to do this silly little form for me. (After the third time there has been a public scandal because I did it wrong”.

John Roberts bears responsibility to. I’ve clerked. Our Court took these seriously, top to bottom. The Court keeps saying it can self regulate.  But there are no sanctions, starting with a public statement from the Court, for blowing them off. [/quote]

Roberts can't do anything because Thomas can't be removed absent impeachment (which republicans would never support). Rules only matter when you have the power to enforce them [/quote]
Roberts could bring pressure to bear to get Thomas to resign and leave the court with a shred of dignity, but he’s not going to. Roberts puts a well behaved gloss on things, but he’s as big a fascist as the rest of the regressive justices. He participated in the Brooks Brothers riot, same as Amy and Bretty. [/quote]

I'm not sure what the rules of the court might allow - could Roberts (or a court majority) avoid assigning him any opinions, refuse to allow him to ask questions during oral argument (not much of a penalty!), not publish his dissents, not allow him to vote on cases? [/quote]

You can't pull his vote- that's the whole life time tenure thing. Roberts could refuse to assign him opinions, but he can concur or dissent and other judges are free to join his concurrences which could give you an awkward situation where the opinion has 1 vote, the concurrence has 5 justices joining it and the dissent has 3. [/quote]

Life tenure doesn't mean you have a lifetime vote.  For example, on the circuit courts, judges on senior status don't get to vote on en banc appeals.   [/quote]

Judges choose to take senior judge status. Thomas would never choose to not vote [/quote]

It can actually be forced too.  That process is going on right now with Judge Newman on the Federal Circuit.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics