Clarence Thomas

[obelixtim 100]

On 4/9/2023 at 7:22 AM, gowlerk said:

As a general rule we are all much better off when we listen to the women.

My girlfriend says I have two major faults: 

I never listen, and something else....

[phantomII 36]

Looks like Harlan Crow, the Nazi memorabilia collecting billionaire, bought himself a fine black SC Justice.

[wmw999 2,122]

1 hour ago, phantomII said:

Looks like Harlan Crow, the Nazi memorabilia collecting billionaire, bought himself a fine black SC Justice.

Oh, I’m sure he can keep his work and personal life separate. After all, his wife is a MAGA activist who colluded (albeit tangentially) in the insurrection on January 6!

Yes, we really need a sarcasm font

Wendy P. 

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

47 minutes ago, wmw999 said:

Oh, I’m sure he can keep his work and personal life separate. After all, his wife is a MAGA activist who colluded (albeit tangentially) in the insurrection on January 6!

Yes, we really need a sarcasm font

Wendy P. 

Well, to be fair to Thomas, I somewhat doubt that the 'favors' altered any of his decisons.
He would have ruled the same way either with or without the bribery.

And yes, a 'sarcasm' font would be helpful.

[gowlerk 1,912]

10 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Well, to be fair to Thomas, I somewhat doubt that the 'favors' altered any of his decisons.
He would have ruled the same way either with or without the bribery.

And yes, a 'sarcasm' font would be helpful.

Yup, it was all just a thank you for being part of the team. The real problem is that it helps to normalize the perception of bias. Is it purchased bias or is it inherent bias. How can anyone know after a while?

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

Just now, gowlerk said:

Yup, it was all just a thank you for being part of the team. The real problem is that it helps to normalize the perception of bias. Is it purchased bias or is it inherent bias. How can anyone know after a while?

Absolutely. 

It's a VERY clear case of improperly accepting gifts.
It's a VERY clear conflict of interest (even though Crow's & Thomas' 'interests' don't actually conflict).

Similar to the Wisconsin Supreme Court race, where the conservative candidate accepted a large 'campaign contribution' from someone with a case before him, it doesn't really matter that he likely would have ruled the same way with or without the bribe.

It's the accepting a large 'contribution' from someone with a case before him.
And, of course, he didn't see a problem with it.

[BIGUN 1,053]

21 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

It's a VERY clear conflict of interest (even though Crow's & Thomas' 'interests' don't actually conflict).

*a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.

[BIGUN 1,053]

28 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

How can anyone know after a while?

Doesn't matter. There are federal laws that limit the financial gifts a federal employee can accept AND even if approved - you're subject to it being taxed as unearned income. 

[gowlerk 1,912]

9 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

*a situation in which a person is in a position to derive personal benefit from actions or decisions made in their official capacity.

Thomas is in a posistion where he can choose to either please or displease his wife. Surely we can all agree that he has a personal interest in that.

[gowlerk 1,912]

1 minute ago, BIGUN said:

Doesn't matter. There are federal laws that limit the financial gifts a federal employee can accept AND even if approved - you're subject to it being taxed as unearned income. 

I agree with that. But it also doesn't matter because SCOTUS makes it's own rules and there ain't nuthin anyone can do about it.

[BIGUN 1,053]

1 minute ago, gowlerk said:

Thomas is in a posistion where he can choose to either please or displease his wife. Surely we can all agree that he has a personal interest in that.

Doesn't matter. He's not getting a check from his wife, but the American taxpayer. [she'll be very displeased to no longer be married or be married to a disgraced Jurist]

[BIGUN 1,053]

2 minutes ago, gowlerk said:

But it also doesn't matter because SCOTUS makes it's own rules and there ain't nuthin anyone can do about it.

Abe Fortas

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Just now, wmw999 said:

Yes, we really need a sarcasm font

Negative. It's always a poor workman who blames their tools. All SC sarcasm font complainers should work on their technique instead. 

[wolfriverjoe 1,340]

1 minute ago, BIGUN said:

Abe Fortas

Fortas resigned in disgrace.

I doubt Thomas will resign.

He might get prosecuted for failing to report gifts. Possibly tax evasion.

I highly doubt he would be removed by impeachment.
I highly doubt the R controlled house would impeach him.

[gowlerk 1,912]

4 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Abe Fortas

I did not know of that affair. It is interesting. It involved a substantial cash gift. Nice to see that the political and legal class has since learned it's lesson and moved to more subtle accomodations and hospitality between friends.

[gowlerk 1,912]

5 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Negative. It's always a poor workman who blames their tools. All SC sarcasm font complainers should work on their technique instead. 

The readers of the sarcasm should generally be able to decipher it upon a close and careful reading. If unsure and it seems outrageous you most likely need to read it again and think for awhile.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Just now, gowlerk said:

The readers of the sarcasm should generally be able to decipher it upon a close and careful reading. If unsure and it seems outrageous you most likely need to read it again and think for awhile.

Our course, there's always a chance it's fake sarcasm.

[gowlerk 1,912]

3 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Our course, there's always a chance it's fake sarcasm.

I would rule that out except in the case of you or possibly Ron D.

[normiss 622]

24 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Negative. It's always a poor workman who blames their tools. All SC sarcasm font complainers should work on their technique instead. 

It feels like you should have ended with a /s.

 

[SkyDekker 1,122]

51 minutes ago, BIGUN said:

Doesn't matter. There are federal laws that limit the financial gifts a federal employee can accept AND even if approved - you're subject to it being taxed as unearned income. 

Sure but laws are for plebs, not for supreme court justices. Nothing, absolutely nothing will come of this.

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, gowlerk said:

I would rule that out except in the case of you or possibly Ron D.

Poe's Law in action.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

Just now, billvon said:

Poe's Law in action.

I resemble that remark!

[BIGUN 1,053]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Poe's Law in action.

Were you aware.

https://www.nbc12.com/2022/07/27/former-volunteer-coach-charged-with-online-sexual-offense-involving-minor-henrico/

1 hour ago, JoeWeber said:

I resemble that remark!

Not in the least. 

[wmw999 2,122]

Back in the days of usenet, there was a poster who signed all of his posts with SDNWOTN: Sarcasm does not work on the net...

Wendy P.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

3 hours ago, wolfriverjoe said:

Fortas resigned in disgrace.

I doubt Thomas will resign.

He might get prosecuted for failing to report gifts. Possibly tax evasion.

I highly doubt he would be removed by impeachment.
I highly doubt the R controlled house would impeach him.

Hi Joe,

See Post #5.

Jerry Baumchen