DOJ needs to get on this. Do Dems have to make a formal request to investigate?
DOJ needs to get on this. Do Dems have to make a formal request to investigate?Thomas is clearly in violation of US tax laws. Gifts or prizes valued at over $600 are subject to regular income tax. Throw his ass in jail.
For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks.
The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court.
These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.
The two men met in the mid-1990s, a few years after Justice Thomas joined the court. Since then, Mr. Crow has done many favors for the justice and his wife, Virginia, helping finance a Savannah library project dedicated to Justice Thomas, presenting him with a Bible that belonged to Frederick Douglass and reportedly providing $500,000 for Ms. Thomas to start a Tea Party-related group.
But Mr. Crow’s financing of the museum, his largest such act of generosity, previously unreported, raises the sharpest questions yet — both about Justice Thomas’s extrajudicial activities and about the extent to which the justices should remain exempt from the code of conduct for federal judges.
Although the Supreme Court is not bound by the code, justices have said they adhere to it. Legal ethicists differed on whether Justice Thomas’s dealings with Mr. Crow pose a problem under the code. But they agreed that one facet of the relationship was both unusual and important in weighing any ethical implications: Justice Thomas’s role in Mr. Crow’s donation for the museum.
The code says judges “should not personally participate” in raising money for charitable endeavors, out of concern that donors might feel pressured to give or entitled to favorable treatment from the judge. In addition, judges are not even supposed to know who donates to projects honoring them.
On the other hand, the restriction on fund-raising is primarily meant to deter judges from using their position to pressure donors, as opposed to relying on “a rich friend” like Mr. Crow, said Ronald D. Rotunda, who teaches legal ethics at Chapman University in California.
Crow is one of the fucking bastards who helped bankroll the Tea Party movement. That fucking movement is what turned politics into the pathetic shit show it is today with people like MTG and Santos and Cruz and the rest of those coontzMr. Crow, 61, manages the real estate and investment businesses founded by his late father, Trammell Crow, once the largest landlord in the United States. The Crow family portfolio is worth hundreds of millions of dollars and includes investments in hotels, medical facilities, public equities and hedge funds.
Unless they can be truly shown certain judicial decisions were influenced, impossible to charge him for accepting bribes. Again only congress can officially do anything.DOJ needs to get on this. Do Dems have to make a formal request to investigate?
Tax law violations. He failed to disclose. The IRS can be all over this.Unless they can be truly shown certain judicial decisions were influenced, impossible to charge him for accepting bribes. Again only congress can officially do anything.
It should be noted that SCOTUS essentially legalized bribery a few years back so prosecuting anyone for this, much less a SCOTUS justice, is impossible. So long as someone doesn't hand him a cartoon dollar sign sack with a note that says 'this is for Clarence Thomas to rule in my favor' he is fine.Unless they can be truly shown certain judicial decisions were influenced, impossible to charge him for accepting bribes. Again only congress can officially do anything.
It would be hard for Clarence Thomas to claim that he didn't know the law, so he therefore had to know that the gift of trips, etc is all taxable income and must be reported on your income taxes. Quite a few actors and actresses have been jailed for income tax evasion. We can't have exceptions to the rule of law because of your position in government or society.Tax law violations. He failed to disclose. The IRS can be all over this.
I was assured in this very forum that the tea party was an earnest, grassroots movement to, among other goals, <checks notes> return politics to the common man and get money out of politics.Crow is one of the fucking bastards who helped bankroll the Tea Party movement. That fucking movement is what turned politics into the pathetic shit show it is today with people like MTG and Santos and Cruz and the rest of those coontz
Can't claim that because one of Thomas's first gifts a 19K bible he did declare. Now's the time the White House and Dems in Congress DEMAND SCOTUS apply the same ethics laws governing federal judges to themselves otherwise risk defunding, impeachment hearings. Senate can start those hearings. Doesn't matter if Thomas can be expelled but shine the light on those fuckers and embarrass them into irrelevancy.It would be hard for Clarence Thomas to claim that he didn't know the law, so he therefore had to know that the gift of trips, etc is all taxable income and must be reported on your income taxes. Quite a few actors and actresses have been jailed for income tax evasion. We can't have exceptions to the rule of law because of your position in government or society.
Donald is a fucking moron. He's evil without knowing he's evil. Take his brother from another mother, Boris Johnson. A clever man who parades as an dimwit asshole but manages to fuck everything up on purpose. Very competent pushing right wing theory without help. Trump needed the help of the right wing, and through their own volition are his bitch now.That guy and Donald Trump are equally evil. There is no doubt about it.
Haha yes, the Tea Party was truly committed to the principles of small government, which is why the same people today think the government should regulate if men dressed as women can read books to children.I was assured in this very forum that the tea party was an earnest, grassroots movement to, among other goals, <checks notes> return politics to the common man and get money out of politics.
Whats beautiful about this strategy is any attempts at retribution are inherently dilutative. They cant go back without impeachment (which they cant do) and any further court packing diminishes returns.An even number of justices is a bad idea because one of the main purposes of SCOTUS is to resolve splits between circuit courts. It's a bad to have the law function differently in different parts of the country.
As for your overall plan I'm fine with that, although conservatives will (rightly) view it as an attempt to reduce their power and will probably retaliate. I'm okay with them retaliating because that's probably inevitable if we're going to fix the problem but you mentioned it as a concern.
As if going after same sex marriage wasn't bad enough...interfaith and especially interracial, what the fuck. This is taking us back to the 50s and 60s now. How much further can we regress? Has any country's government ever regressed so much without a complete collapse?edit: Sorry I got this wrong. The bill allows refusal for same sex, interfaith, or interracial couples. Surprisingly a few of these landed in Thomas's opinion not long ago.
It's called the Republican agenda. Back to the good ole' days where minorities had limited rights and we didn't speak of them in school.As if going after same sex marriage wasn't bad enough...interfaith and especially interracial, what the fuck. This is taking us back to the 50s and 60s now. How much further can we regress?
when I read about it the other day only the gay marriage bit was brought up. I had to refer to the bill's premise to see if I had it right then saw those. Fun fact. Remember Anita Bryant? She disappeared for good in the 90s but prior to that she began the anti gay movement here in the states. It was before I lived here but bear with me. I learned a few years ago her right hand man was Falwell's dad. Yes that Falwell who had salacious photos of another man. Bryant always struck me as a bitter closeted lesbian.As if going after same sex marriage wasn't bad enough...interfaith and especially interracial, what the fuck. This is taking us back to the 50s and 60s now. How much further can we regress?
It has to be the only things about that era that they could be pining for. Most other things of that time are things they'd be fighting against these days, like higher taxes on wealthy and stronger Unions and worker's rights, well-funded education system, etc.It's called the Republican agenda. Back to the good ole' days where minorities had limited rights and we didn't speak of them in school.
And then you have racial minorities who are republicans and vote republican, and then you have the gays who are republican. There's now a slow growing movement called lgb without the t started up by right wing gays and some bird brained left wing gays, all funded by the right. It's picked up steam ever since the terf movement sprang back up. Terfs have been around for a long time now but didn't get much publicity until the harry potter author opened her big fat mouth and removed all decency.It's called the Republican agenda. Back to the good ole' days where minorities had limited rights and we didn't speak of them in school.
The logic of the Roe opinion very clearly applies to gay marriage and interracial marriage and Thomas was at least consistent (albeit evil) in saying they should all be scrapped. Alito's opinion was just desperately Calvinballing their way around that fact.for the record as I've no skin in this game but Tennessee recently passed a clerk law allowing a clerk to deny a marriage certificate to gay couples if he or she didn't feel okay doing it but would pass it onto someone who was fine with it as I understand. This law was written and passed in the hopes of a gay couple taking the L and biting back and it slowly working its way up through to the sc and managing to somehow overturn same sex marriage despite the RfMA passing this past fall.
edit: Sorry I got this wrong. The bill allows refusal for same sex, interfaith, or interracial couples. Surprisingly a few of these landed in Thomas's opinion not long ago.