Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unfortunate. I'm very sorry it's ended this way.

My guess is there were other instances where he was harassing women (in addition to Anita Hill), and the people giving him all these perks ever so gently suggested they had the goods on him.

Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to establish a way to catch these things early on, and a process to deal with the justices accepting gifts (bribes) like this.

Bribery is the cancer that destroys a nation.

At least under Roberts, but perhaps any Republican court, the Supreme Court has shown they believe themselves to be above the law.

This is a human problem, not a political party problem.

I’m watching Republicans contort themselves into crazy shapes to say that something is states rights except not in that specific case but it is here but again not in that case and it’s up to the people but no, not like that… Republicans literally do not think they are to be constrained within any kind of law, decision or custom, even when they themselves have been the ones to create that standard.

They have a lot of confidence that abandoning the rule of law is going to work well for them. Mussolini would like a word. Nicholas II, Marie Antoinette, and the entire 1950s Chinese petty bourgeoisie would also like a word.

But really- they do have confidence and nothing is happening to them. I'm sick of watching the bad guys win.

God. Me too. Especially since they seem to emulate clown car Austin Powere like levels of cartoon villainy. These people aren't Machiavellian geniuses. They're grasping, greedy, and not good at their jobs. So how do they win?

Grossly simplifying things, I think part of it is the Dems like to think it matters that they have moral high ground.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would it have mattered if he wanted to leave the court in January 2000, just after W. had just been elected? Let him retire and appoint someone else. Why was Clarence so special that billionaires needed to jump through hoops to pay him?

Because he was the most reliable conservative vote on the SC. He could be counted to vote the right way 100% of the time.

And he was willing to be bought.

I can’t be the only one reading all this and wondering why he doesn’t understand he’s being purchased by white men? You’d think that would disturb him.

He could have been a historically honorable and noble person in the most revered positions of society but instead he literally sold himself to white men.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unfortunate. I'm very sorry it's ended this way.

My guess is there were other instances where he was harassing women (in addition to Anita Hill), and the people giving him all these perks ever so gently suggested they had the goods on him.

Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to establish a way to catch these things early on, and a process to deal with the justices accepting gifts (bribes) like this.

Bribery is the cancer that destroys a nation.

At least under Roberts, but perhaps any Republican court, the Supreme Court has shown they believe themselves to be above the law.

This is a human problem, not a political party problem.

I’m watching Republicans contort themselves into crazy shapes to say that something is states rights except not in that specific case but it is here but again not in that case and it’s up to the people but no, not like that… Republicans literally do not think they are to be constrained within any kind of law, decision or custom, even when they themselves have been the ones to create that standard.

They have a lot of confidence that abandoning the rule of law is going to work well for them. Mussolini would like a word. Nicholas II, Marie Antoinette, and the entire 1950s Chinese petty bourgeoisie would also like a word.

But really- they do have confidence and nothing is happening to them. I'm sick of watching the bad guys win.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unfortunate. I'm very sorry it's ended this way.

My guess is there were other instances where he was harassing women (in addition to Anita Hill), and the people giving him all these perks ever so gently suggested they had the goods on him.

Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to establish a way to catch these things early on, and a process to deal with the justices accepting gifts (bribes) like this.

Bribery is the cancer that destroys a nation.

At least under Roberts, but perhaps any Republican court, the Supreme Court has shown they believe themselves to be above the law.

This is a human problem, not a political party problem.

I’m watching Republicans contort themselves into crazy shapes to say that something is states rights except not in that specific case but it is here but again not in that case and it’s up to the people but no, not like that… Republicans literally do not think they are to be constrained within any kind of law, decision or custom, even when they themselves have been the ones to create that standard.

They have a lot of confidence that abandoning the rule of law is going to work well for them. Mussolini would like a word. Nicholas II, Marie Antoinette, and the entire 1950s Chinese petty bourgeoisie would also like a word.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unfortunate. I'm very sorry it's ended this way.

My guess is there were other instances where he was harassing women (in addition to Anita Hill), and the people giving him all these perks ever so gently suggested they had the goods on him.

Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to establish a way to catch these things early on, and a process to deal with the justices accepting gifts (bribes) like this.

Bribery is the cancer that destroys a nation.

At least under Roberts, but perhaps any Republican court, the Supreme Court has shown they believe themselves to be above the law.

This is a human problem, not a political party problem.

I’m watching Republicans contort themselves into crazy shapes to say that something is states rights except not in that specific case but it is here but again not in that case and it’s up to the people but no, not like that… Republicans literally do not think they are to be constrained within any kind of law, decision or custom, even when they themselves have been the ones to create that standard.

Anonymous wrote:Conservatives are now just admitting they had a plan to finance Thomas' champagne and yacht taste which apparently he couldn't afford making $275,000 a year and say there's nothing wrong with that.

Meanwhile Ginni Thomas was at the heart of the Jan 6 conspiracy but no sign Thomas is recusing.

The lack of shame is just remarkable. Abe Fortas resigned from the court for less.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unfortunate. I'm very sorry it's ended this way.

My guess is there were other instances where he was harassing women (in addition to Anita Hill), and the people giving him all these perks ever so gently suggested they had the goods on him.

Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to establish a way to catch these things early on, and a process to deal with the justices accepting gifts (bribes) like this.

Bribery is the cancer that destroys a nation.

At least under Roberts, but perhaps any Republican court, the Supreme Court has shown they believe themselves to be above the law.

This is a human problem, not a political party problem.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Very unfortunate. I'm very sorry it's ended this way.

My guess is there were other instances where he was harassing women (in addition to Anita Hill), and the people giving him all these perks ever so gently suggested they had the goods on him.

Perhaps the Supreme Court needs to establish a way to catch these things early on, and a process to deal with the justices accepting gifts (bribes) like this.

Bribery is the cancer that destroys a nation.

At least under Roberts, but perhaps any Republican court, the Supreme Court has shown they believe themselves to be above the law.

Anonymous wrote:When you don’t think he can get any lower, he finds a way. Such an a- hole.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would it have mattered if he wanted to leave the court in January 2000, just after W. had just been elected? Let him retire and appoint someone else. Why was Clarence so special that billionaires needed to jump through hoops to pay him?

Because he was the most reliable conservative vote on the SC. He could be counted to vote the right way 100% of the time.

And he was willing to be bought.

I can’t be the only one reading all this and wondering why he doesn’t understand he’s being purchased by white men? You’d think that would disturb him.

He could have been a historically honorable and noble person in the most revered positions of society but instead he literally sold himself to white men.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would it have mattered if he wanted to leave the court in January 2000, just after W. had just been elected? Let him retire and appoint someone else. Why was Clarence so special that billionaires needed to jump through hoops to pay him?

Because he was the most reliable conservative vote on the SC. He could be counted to vote the right way 100% of the time.

And he was willing to be bought.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would it have mattered if he wanted to leave the court in January 2000, just after W. had just been elected? Let him retire and appoint someone else. Why was Clarence so special that billionaires needed to jump through hoops to pay him?

Hilarious. This Stearns character quotes Immanuel Kant of all people. Aren’t fascists enthralled by Kant?