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:

Anonymous wrote:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?

He sold a lot of books: https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-book-sales-declined-during-his-first-year-in-office-11652483247

Yeah, that’s how he did it

If you don’t think so you can check his tax returns.
https://joebiden.com/financial-disclosure/#

You are your pesky facts.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harlan Crow collects Hitler and Nazi artifacts. As someone who appreciates history, I can respect that. BUT he then displays them all over his house - THAT is creepy and definitely makes you question his motives.

Like you're sitting down for dinner and this is on the wall?

Displaying conquests of the country he loves? It's a triumph trophy. Not uncommon.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash: People - even Supreme Court Justices - are friends with and vacation with people who are like-minded. Some of them are even wealthy!!!
Shocker!!!

Vacationing with people who are likeminded is one thing. Having those friends pay every cent of your luxurious vacation is quite another. I don’t vacation on my friends’ dimes …. Particularly not to the tune of $500,000 a vacation.

Agree 100% I have never had any friend pay or subsidize my vacation expenses to Justice Corrupt's extent. Even when I am invited to a beach house, I make sure to bring an expensive bottle of wine and/or pay for dinner out at the beach. I would not even dream about accepting this sort of vacation. [And I certainly have plenty of friends in the top 1%.] Justice Thomas is simply corrupt.

How do you know he didn't reciprocate with gifts?

please be serious.

The op has unwittingly hit on why Thomas’s corruption is so rotting to the country. He did reciprocate - with decisions beneficial to Crow and the far right interests Crow represents.

That poster brought up an expensive bottle of wine, but yeah that's totally outside of the realm of possibility for CT to give to a friend.

Anonymous wrote:Harlan Crow collects Hitler and Nazi artifacts. As someone who appreciates history, I can respect that. BUT he then displays them all over his house - THAT is creepy and definitely makes you question his motives.

Like you're sitting down for dinner and this is on the wall?

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:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?

He sold a lot of books: https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-book-sales-declined-during-his-first-year-in-office-11652483247

Yeah, that’s how he did it

If you don’t think so you can check his tax returns.
https://joebiden.com/financial-disclosure/#

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash: People - even Supreme Court Justices - are friends with and vacation with people who are like-minded. Some of them are even wealthy!!!
Shocker!!!

Vacationing with people who are likeminded is one thing. Having those friends pay every cent of your luxurious vacation is quite another. I don’t vacation on my friends’ dimes …. Particularly not to the tune of $500,000 a vacation.

Agree 100% I have never had any friend pay or subsidize my vacation expenses to Justice Corrupt's extent. Even when I am invited to a beach house, I make sure to bring an expensive bottle of wine and/or pay for dinner out at the beach. I would not even dream about accepting this sort of vacation. [And I certainly have plenty of friends in the top 1%.] Justice Thomas is simply corrupt.

How do you know he didn't reciprocate with gifts?

please be serious.

The op has unwittingly hit on why Thomas’s corruption is so rotting to the country. He did reciprocate - with decisions beneficial to Crow and the far right interests Crow represents.

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:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?

He sold a lot of books: https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-book-sales-declined-during-his-first-year-in-office-11652483247

Yeah, that’s how he did it

If you don’t think so you can check his tax returns.
https://joebiden.com/financial-disclosure/#

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Newsflash: People - even Supreme Court Justices - are friends with and vacation with people who are like-minded. Some of them are even wealthy!!!
Shocker!!!

Vacationing with people who are likeminded is one thing. Having those friends pay every cent of your luxurious vacation is quite another. I don’t vacation on my friends’ dimes …. Particularly not to the tune of $500,000 a vacation.

Agree 100% I have never had any friend pay or subsidize my vacation expenses to Justice Corrupt's extent. Even when I am invited to a beach house, I make sure to bring an expensive bottle of wine and/or pay for dinner out at the beach. I would not even dream about accepting this sort of vacation. [And I certainly have plenty of friends in the top 1%.] Justice Thomas is simply corrupt.

How do you know he didn't reciprocate with gifts?

please be serious.

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:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?

He sold a lot of books: https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-book-sales-declined-during-his-first-year-in-office-11652483247

Yeah, that’s how he did it

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:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?

He sold a lot of books: https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-book-sales-declined-during-his-first-year-in-office-11652483247

Yeah, that’s how he did it

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?

He sold a lot of books: https://www.wsj.com/articles/biden-book-sales-declined-during-his-first-year-in-office-11652483247

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:CT has spoken. Says he was advised that personal hospitality didn't need to be disclosed, but he will start to comply with the newly revised guidance that closes the personal hospitality loophole next year.

https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/3939159-clarence-thomas-said-he-was-advised-he-didnt-have-to-disclose-trips-paid-for-by-gop-donor/

That’s BS. He WAS disclosing it earlier in his tenure but then he stopped.

He says 25 years. That would mean they weren't friends when he first joined the court.

+1

I think the PP who posted Heather Cox Richardson’s post had a Chris Murphy quote in it that Crow only sought out Thomas after he made it onto the court. Blatant corruption.

So in your view, there would've been no way for Thomas to form a genuine friendship and personal relationship with someone as rich as Crow?

Let's just assume these guys are soulmates. Thomas would love to just hang out with Crow at Walmarts and barbeques and whatnot but Crow has more exotic tastes. Thomas has no choice but to go along with these lavish accommodations. The alternative would be a painful, unendurable separation from his dear, dear friend. In that situation, Thomas should recuse himself from cases involving Crow, the companies from which he benefits, and the causes for which he advocates.

Gotcha, has anyone identified which cases Thomas should've recused himself from in which Crow had interests?

Another issue I have heard is spouses who work or associate with law firms that have Supreme Court practices that come before the courts. Should those Justices similarly recuse themselves?

Thomas should have just paid his own way. If he cannot afford to do that, he cannot afford to go (just like the vast majority of Americans)

Thanks. So you know about which cases or nah?

It doesn't matter. No federal employee should be accepting huge gifts from anybody. They should live off their salary.

Fully agree. How did the Bidens get so wealthy again?