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:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.
What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.
All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.
Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.
Roberts and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are the only ones holding things together. They are stuck between LFNJs and RWNJs.
Nope. He's complicit. He could hold justices accountable for their corruption and lies, but he doesn't.
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:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.
What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.
All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.
Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.
Roberts and to a lesser extent Kavanaugh are the only ones holding things together. They are stuck between LFNJs and RWNJs.
Anonymous wrote:There is no conflict with the activities of his wife unless she is a party to a Supreme Court case which is not likely to ever happen. I the world that we have constructed today as opposed to the one that existed in the 1950s we cannot and should not disqualify a spouse based on what the other spouse does. Both spouses work. In NY one may be an investment banker for one firm and the other for another firm. They compete. They may be on opposite sides of a deal. Or they may be traders on opposite sides of transactions. We should not be disqualifying either. In DC it is not uncommon to have spouses on opposite sides of advocacy firms on the same issues. That is fine. It has to be or women will be the one losing in the end. I see this as no different. Who cares what she advocates? Do you think for a moment CT cares? Would any spouse? I do not think so if you have a sworn duty. So I think this is all a dumb issue. I public life and in corporate life we will be seeing more and more of this ad we have to be ok with it.
Anonymous wrote:There is no conflict with the activities of his wife unless she is a party to a Supreme Court case which is not likely to ever happen. I the world that we have constructed today as opposed to the one that existed in the 1950s we cannot and should not disqualify a spouse based on what the other spouse does. Both spouses work. In NY one may be an investment banker for one firm and the other for another firm. They compete. They may be on opposite sides of a deal. Or they may be traders on opposite sides of transactions. We should not be disqualifying either. In DC it is not uncommon to have spouses on opposite sides of advocacy firms on the same issues. That is fine. It has to be or women will be the one losing in the end. I see this as no different. Who cares what she advocates? Do you think for a moment CT cares? Would any spouse? I do not think so if you have a sworn duty. So I think this is all a dumb issue. I public life and in corporate life we will be seeing more and more of this ad we have to be ok with 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:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.
What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.
All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.
Disgusting that Roberts and the GOP have destroyed the SCOTUS.
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:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.
What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.
All the right wing justices are. Each and every one lied in their “job interview” at a minimum and not a one seems to understand why their job exists or what the Constitution and the Bill of Rights means.
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:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.
What a corrupt SCOTUS justice.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Why is he constantly giving paid speeches to right wing groups who have agendas that may end up in his court? Virtually all the articles that begin with, “Clarence Thomas says…” quote from one of his almost weekly speeches. What an attention whore.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Just like Trump showed us all of the ways a POTUS could abuse his power, Thomas is showing us all of the ways to abuse his.
We can no longer rely on ethics. We need real consequences for SCOTUS corruption.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Because there’s no requirement to do so for Supreme Court justices, but every other judge/justice in the land is required to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety. Go figure.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
He’s never disabused the notion that he’s in agreement with her.
He doesn’t have to, that’s not how this works.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.
It takes a special kind of person to hold someone responsible for the actions of their spouse. I guess if your husband cheats on you, you must be a cheater too based on your logic.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
What does a justice’s refusal to resign or even recuse himself, despite being significantly compromised, say about him? Dan Rather had enough decency and integrity to have shame.
And you know he’s compromised how? What’s your proof?
Why are you posting here if you don’t follow politics or current events very closely and haven’t read this thread or the lengthy article about Ginni Thomas linked in this thread?
PP is just aSkInG qUeSTioNs.
It takes a special kind of person to ask this question on page 30 of a thread about the exact thing they’ve asked.
“Special” is one word for it.