SCOTUS

[runrussellrun]

“The idea that Leonard Leo, who has a passionate ideological interest in how the court rules and who has worked hard for years to advance that interest, could pick up the phone and generate substantial compensation to Virginia Thomas, which also benefits Clarence Thomas — that idea is bad for the country, the court and the rule of law,” Gillers said. “It’s not the way the Supreme Court should do its business or allow its business to be done.”

All they had to do was believe Anita Hill. She tried to tell us what a POS and immoral man we were dealing with......we didn't want to hear it, apparently.

Oh well. Nothing we can do now.

+1

... you can go after the scumbags he has been corrupted by. Laws have very likely been broken. These people don't want to be in the news. Most of all keep the POS in the news, day and night for the rest of their hopefully short miserable lives. Keep the social pressure on all of them.

This was right around the time that Capital Hill has themselves a "slush fund" to pay off all those cute girls who got sexually harassed, yes ?

Good luck getting that information, since we are digging up 30 year old ethic violations.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/congr ... -harassed/

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/16/politics ... index.html

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/ ... und-255547


TAATS

[ggait]

Thomas is of course untouchable. Life tenured SCOTUS judge subject to basically zero ethics guidelines.

Only remove-able via impeachment. Which wouldn't happen even if he shot someone on 5th Avenue.

Best we can do is shame the judges into self-regulating, at least to the extent of disclosure.

Sunlight's a pretty good disinfectant. You think Harlan Crow is going to continue to gravy train Thomas now that he knows the press is going to be all over that stuff? This dreck primarily breeds in the darkness.

[cradleandshoot]

What is that term invented by Al Gore... No controlling legal authority?? The Supremes have been granted the power to do pretty much what ever they want to do. Roberts will never acquiesce to letting the Dems compose a code of conduct for the court. As far as justice Thomas is concerned, he found his own path towards reparations. Y'all should be happy for him.

This isn't a party thing. The proof to that would be the fit hitting the shan if Soros was taking Sotomayor on six figure whirlwind trips. Unless of course if that would be OK with Republicans.

Of course it is a party thing. Now the door to what bennies the members of the SCOTUS have received over the years will swing both ways. IMO there is a very good reason why justice Roberts doesn't want to venture down this road. He already knows the answer to the question.

I don't understand.

We should ALL be concerned with the loss of confidence in the Court's ethics.

But right now, that concern seems to be predominantly getting expressed by one party, though there are a few voices from traditional conservatives expressing concern as well.

It should be non-partisan.
It should not matter whether the Justice is "conservative" or "liberal".

What do you think Roberts "already knows"... other than his own wife has made $10 million in fees?
That those are going to be examined for conflicts?

We will all have to wait for the MSM to complete their deep dive into all 9 of the SCOTUS justices. The focus has been on one justice. As far as I'm concerned this one justice should simply claim reparations.

Like saying one thief can’t be prosecuted until you find them all.

There are 9 bumpkins all lined up in a row. Is Thomas the only bumpkin worthy of all of the scrutiny? You think I'm busting your balls when I say this... Justice Thomas is only claiming for himself as a black man what reparations are owed to him. If a bunch of white former slave owners want to pay him then so be it. Did Thomas do something illegal?? Thomas did not do anything that generations of politicians and judges from both sides have been doing for many years. I have to find it very curious that a bunch of pig headed white FLP liberals are going to lynch a conservative black man because he is getting what he is owed as a black man who endured every hate filled racist stereotype you all opine about every day. Justice Thomas is taking advantage of the system that does not hold him accountable. Whose fault is that??

... the naivete of our infallible founders who wrote the constitution (and baby Jesus if you believe he was there).

If you believe the usual suspects on this forum our founding fathers were in no way infallible. They gave us slavery after all those rat bastard SoBs. You waiting in line for reparations???

[MDlaxfan76]

As I've previously described, some 'hospitality' has been happening for decades, to my knowledge. I've described some weekend excursions to Eastern Shore with O'Connor and Scalia which my parents attended. I think perhaps also quail hunts in Georgia.

But we're talking a night or two of dining and some hunting, and I don't think transportation. And they may well have been reported by the Justices, (IMO should be), but none of these were beyond federal gift levels and I very much doubt that the billionaire involved would have done anything else other than those entertainments. The billionaire, owned banks in and around DC, was conservative by nature but not an ideologue and I don't think was ever seeking judicial influence. Just not his style. He did like interesting people.

That said, it's not as if his business wasn't impacted by legislation or political processes. My dad helped him battle the Saudis, BCCI, in their effort to get a foothold in US banking (foreign ownership being illegal). On the other side were major lobbyists out of both GOP and DEM administrations. Big hitters. Including Clark Clifford. The Reagan and Bush DOJ turned a blind eye. As did Congress. Fortunately, NY DA Bob Morgenthau took up the cause of proving BCCI's corruption.

https://irp.fas.org/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/09ny.htm

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm ... story.html

https://www.tampabay.com/archive/1993/1 ... bcci-case/

What we're looking at in the Thomas case goes way, way, way beyond some hospitality. The obvious efforts to hide these various 'gifts', including direct cash (laundered through another company for 'polling' services but don't mention Ginny), in ways that clearly are intended to skirt the letter, not spirit, of the 'rules' tells us all we really need to know.

Value was transferred, intentionally surreptitiously, with "plausible deniability" if caught.

[MDlaxfan76]

“The idea that Leonard Leo, who has a passionate ideological interest in how the court rules and who has worked hard for years to advance that interest, could pick up the phone and generate substantial compensation to Virginia Thomas, which also benefits Clarence Thomas — that idea is bad for the country, the court and the rule of law,” Gillers said. “It’s not the way the Supreme Court should do its business or allow its business to be done.”

All they had to do was believe Anita Hill. She tried to tell us what a POS and immoral man we were dealing with......we didn't want to hear it, apparently.

Oh well. Nothing we can do now.

You're 100% right. Thomas neutered all of them then with the "high tech lynching" defense. Joe Biden, as chair of the Senate committee, is foremost to blame for cowering.

I'm sure a lot of Senators and former Senators regret their call on Thomas. Undoubtedly including Biden.

Decades before "me-too", sense of hope for more diversity on Court, etc.

But that's 3 decades ago...the issue is what do the current Senators do?
Even more importantly (hopefully) is the question as to whether the Court as a whole has the guts to make hard decisions when it comes to policing themselves. They should step up, but will they?

And then back to the Senators if they do not.

And then to voters...

Meanwhile, it remains disgraceful that Congress balks at its own regulation, stock trading etc.
But people did go to jail when they were found to have taken trips paid for by lobbyist Abramoff...it's not a close call as to whether its ethical.

Try as much as you want MD, you can never transform a pickle back to a cucumber. IMO justice Thomas used the high tech lynching defense to make him the justice he is today. I think he has a lot of personal resentments towards alot of folks in charge in DC today. Y'all can complain about him until the cows come home but he is one of nine who is bullet proof.

Let's lose the "bulletproof" analogy, as unfortunately, no one is.

I think the odds of removal by impeachment or stepping down are below 1%, though that means the classic "you're saying I have a chance?" remains. Would need 16 R's, so ain't gonna happen....but this keeps getting worse and worse, so if actual criminal activity has happened, never know.

But I don't think claiming "high tech lynching" holds any sway any more, probably won't again in our lifetimes. Just a raw political power issue now.

That all said, I don't think ALL of the Justices are corrupt POS, indeed I expect most of them, maybe only with the exception of Alito, are deeply disturbed by this set of ethical revelations and what it means for their institution. Perhaps in varying degrees, I think there's likely some real self-reflection, both institutionally and personally, going on among the Justices and a desire to find a path that restores public trust.

Roberts seems to have failed that test in the immediate moment but I hold out some hope that as the revelations pile up he'll work with others to put in place a much more clear set of rules and consequences.

And meanwhile, the increased "sunlight" on specific transgressions is going to continue until that's pretty well exhausted and the Justices, at least most of them, will be trying to avoid such going forward...a good thing.

But if this all blows over and they galavant away as if nothing happened, that's incredibly bad for our democracy if not responded to electorally.

I'd expect it to matter in 2024 and beyond, ultimately with major Court reform insisted upon by a Congress heavily dominated by progressives. It won't be enough to simply appoint liberal Justices upon the death of the right wingers, they'll increase the size of the Court and hopefully institute ggaits wish of term limits.

Why so quick to lose the bulletproof analogy? There are 9 justices sitting in the SCOTUS that answer to no controlling legal authority. You seem to believe that reality is going to change. Justice Roberts refused to go in front of a Senate panel that wanted his chestnuts roasting on a roaring fire. Roberts may not like Thomas on many levels but he does have his back.

Because we live in a culture of gun violence in which a surprisingly large portion of Americans actually believe in the use of violence to achieve political aims.

ggait's "untouchable" word expresses just fine what you meant.

[PizzaSnake]

“The idea that Leonard Leo, who has a passionate ideological interest in how the court rules and who has worked hard for years to advance that interest, could pick up the phone and generate substantial compensation to Virginia Thomas, which also benefits Clarence Thomas — that idea is bad for the country, the court and the rule of law,” Gillers said. “It’s not the way the Supreme Court should do its business or allow its business to be done.”

All they had to do was believe Anita Hill. She tried to tell us what a POS and immoral man we were dealing with......we didn't want to hear it, apparently.

Oh well. Nothing we can do now.

You're 100% right. Thomas neutered all of them then with the "high tech lynching" defense. Joe Biden, as chair of the Senate committee, is foremost to blame for cowering.

I'm sure a lot of Senators and former Senators regret their call on Thomas. Undoubtedly including Biden.

Decades before "me-too", sense of hope for more diversity on Court, etc.

But that's 3 decades ago...the issue is what do the current Senators do?
Even more importantly (hopefully) is the question as to whether the Court as a whole has the guts to make hard decisions when it comes to policing themselves. They should step up, but will they?

And then back to the Senators if they do not.

And then to voters...

Meanwhile, it remains disgraceful that Congress balks at its own regulation, stock trading etc.
But people did go to jail when they were found to have taken trips paid for by lobbyist Abramoff...it's not a close call as to whether its ethical.

Try as much as you want MD, you can never transform a pickle back to a cucumber. IMO justice Thomas used the high tech lynching defense to make him the justice he is today. I think he has a lot of personal resentments towards alot of folks in charge in DC today. Y'all can complain about him until the cows come home but he is one of nine who is bullet proof.

Let's lose the "bulletproof" analogy, as unfortunately, no one is.

I think the odds of removal by impeachment or stepping down are below 1%, though that means the classic "you're saying I have a chance?" remains. Would need 16 R's, so ain't gonna happen....but this keeps getting worse and worse, so if actual criminal activity has happened, never know.

But I don't think claiming "high tech lynching" holds any sway any more, probably won't again in our lifetimes. Just a raw political power issue now.

That all said, I don't think ALL of the Justices are corrupt POS, indeed I expect most of them, maybe only with the exception of Alito, are deeply disturbed by this set of ethical revelations and what it means for their institution. Perhaps in varying degrees, I think there's likely some real self-reflection, both institutionally and personally, going on among the Justices and a desire to find a path that restores public trust.

Roberts seems to have failed that test in the immediate moment but I hold out some hope that as the revelations pile up he'll work with others to put in place a much more clear set of rules and consequences.

And meanwhile, the increased "sunlight" on specific transgressions is going to continue until that's pretty well exhausted and the Justices, at least most of them, will be trying to avoid such going forward...a good thing.

But if this all blows over and they galavant away as if nothing happened, that's incredibly bad for our democracy if not responded to electorally.

I'd expect it to matter in 2024 and beyond, ultimately with major Court reform insisted upon by a Congress heavily dominated by progressives. It won't be enough to simply appoint liberal Justices upon the death of the right wingers, they'll increase the size of the Court and hopefully institute ggaits wish of term limits.

Why so quick to lose the bulletproof analogy? There are 9 justices sitting in the SCOTUS that answer to no controlling legal authority. You seem to believe that reality is going to change. Justice Roberts refused to go in front of a Senate panel that wanted his chestnuts roasting on a roaring fire. Roberts may not like Thomas on many levels but he does have his back

Because we live in a culture of gun violence in which a surprisingly large portion of Americans actually believe in the use of violence to achieve political aims.

ggait's "untouchable" word expresses just fine what you meant.

So the SC is the American Dalit?

[cradleandshoot]

“The idea that Leonard Leo, who has a passionate ideological interest in how the court rules and who has worked hard for years to advance that interest, could pick up the phone and generate substantial compensation to Virginia Thomas, which also benefits Clarence Thomas — that idea is bad for the country, the court and the rule of law,” Gillers said. “It’s not the way the Supreme Court should do its business or allow its business to be done.”

All they had to do was believe Anita Hill. She tried to tell us what a POS and immoral man we were dealing with......we didn't want to hear it, apparently.

Oh well. Nothing we can do now.

You're 100% right. Thomas neutered all of them then with the "high tech lynching" defense. Joe Biden, as chair of the Senate committee, is foremost to blame for cowering.

I'm sure a lot of Senators and former Senators regret their call on Thomas. Undoubtedly including Biden.

Decades before "me-too", sense of hope for more diversity on Court, etc.

But that's 3 decades ago...the issue is what do the current Senators do?
Even more importantly (hopefully) is the question as to whether the Court as a whole has the guts to make hard decisions when it comes to policing themselves. They should step up, but will they?

And then back to the Senators if they do not.

And then to voters...

Meanwhile, it remains disgraceful that Congress balks at its own regulation, stock trading etc.
But people did go to jail when they were found to have taken trips paid for by lobbyist Abramoff...it's not a close call as to whether its ethical.

Try as much as you want MD, you can never transform a pickle back to a cucumber. IMO justice Thomas used the high tech lynching defense to make him the justice he is today. I think he has a lot of personal resentments towards alot of folks in charge in DC today. Y'all can complain about him until the cows come home but he is one of nine who is bullet proof.

Let's lose the "bulletproof" analogy, as unfortunately, no one is.

I think the odds of removal by impeachment or stepping down are below 1%, though that means the classic "you're saying I have a chance?" remains. Would need 16 R's, so ain't gonna happen....but this keeps getting worse and worse, so if actual criminal activity has happened, never know.

But I don't think claiming "high tech lynching" holds any sway any more, probably won't again in our lifetimes. Just a raw political power issue now.

That all said, I don't think ALL of the Justices are corrupt POS, indeed I expect most of them, maybe only with the exception of Alito, are deeply disturbed by this set of ethical revelations and what it means for their institution. Perhaps in varying degrees, I think there's likely some real self-reflection, both institutionally and personally, going on among the Justices and a desire to find a path that restores public trust.

Roberts seems to have failed that test in the immediate moment but I hold out some hope that as the revelations pile up he'll work with others to put in place a much more clear set of rules and consequences.

And meanwhile, the increased "sunlight" on specific transgressions is going to continue until that's pretty well exhausted and the Justices, at least most of them, will be trying to avoid such going forward...a good thing.

But if this all blows over and they galavant away as if nothing happened, that's incredibly bad for our democracy if not responded to electorally.

I'd expect it to matter in 2024 and beyond, ultimately with major Court reform insisted upon by a Congress heavily dominated by progressives. It won't be enough to simply appoint liberal Justices upon the death of the right wingers, they'll increase the size of the Court and hopefully institute ggaits wish of term limits.

Why so quick to lose the bulletproof analogy? There are 9 justices sitting in the SCOTUS that answer to no controlling legal authority. You seem to believe that reality is going to change. Justice Roberts refused to go in front of a Senate panel that wanted his chestnuts roasting on a roaring fire. Roberts may not like Thomas on many levels but he does have his back.

Because we live in a culture of gun violence in which a surprisingly large portion of Americans actually believe in the use of violence to achieve political aims.

ggait's "untouchable" word expresses just fine what you meant.

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?? How surprisingly large is the portion of Americans who profess violence as a solution?? I know a huge number of Americans who love their guns and yet have no intention of inciting or condoning random violence. You must be making this chit up as you go along? We also live in a country that loves drinking, smoking and gambling among other things.

[cradleandshoot]

Thomas is of course untouchable. Life tenured SCOTUS judge subject to basically zero ethics guidelines.

Only remove-able via impeachment. Which wouldn't happen even if he shot someone on 5th Avenue.

Best we can do is shame the judges into self-regulating, at least to the extent of disclosure.

Sunlight's a pretty good disinfectant. You think Harlan Crow is going to continue to gravy train Thomas now that he knows the press is going to be all over that stuff? This dreck primarily breeds in the darkness.

Cool beaners counselor.There are 8 SCOTUS justices that now need to have their private lives and conversations on social media looked at with fine tooth comb.

[a fan]

Meanwhile, it remains disgraceful that Congress balks at its own regulation, stock trading etc.
But people did go to jail when they were found to have taken trips paid for by lobbyist Abramoff...it's not a close call as to whether its ethical.

Yep. Stock trading in particular.

[PizzaSnake]

Thomas is of course untouchable. Life tenured SCOTUS judge subject to basically zero ethics guidelines.

Only remove-able via impeachment. Which wouldn't happen even if he shot someone on 5th Avenue.

Best we can do is shame the judges into self-regulating, at least to the extent of disclosure.

Sunlight's a pretty good disinfectant. You think Harlan Crow is going to continue to gravy train Thomas now that he knows the press is going to be all over that stuff? This dreck primarily breeds in the darkness.

Cool beaners counselor.There are 8 SCOTUS justices that now need to have their private lives and conversations on social media looked at with fine tooth comb.

For starters. Then Congress and Executive Branch appointees…

We have to discard these tattered notions of humility and couth. None of these offices and their occupants are above inspection and reproach.

[MDlaxfan76]

“The idea that Leonard Leo, who has a passionate ideological interest in how the court rules and who has worked hard for years to advance that interest, could pick up the phone and generate substantial compensation to Virginia Thomas, which also benefits Clarence Thomas — that idea is bad for the country, the court and the rule of law,” Gillers said. “It’s not the way the Supreme Court should do its business or allow its business to be done.”

All they had to do was believe Anita Hill. She tried to tell us what a POS and immoral man we were dealing with......we didn't want to hear it, apparently.

Oh well. Nothing we can do now.

You're 100% right. Thomas neutered all of them then with the "high tech lynching" defense. Joe Biden, as chair of the Senate committee, is foremost to blame for cowering.

I'm sure a lot of Senators and former Senators regret their call on Thomas. Undoubtedly including Biden.

Decades before "me-too", sense of hope for more diversity on Court, etc.

But that's 3 decades ago...the issue is what do the current Senators do?
Even more importantly (hopefully) is the question as to whether the Court as a whole has the guts to make hard decisions when it comes to policing themselves. They should step up, but will they?

And then back to the Senators if they do not.

And then to voters...

Meanwhile, it remains disgraceful that Congress balks at its own regulation, stock trading etc.
But people did go to jail when they were found to have taken trips paid for by lobbyist Abramoff...it's not a close call as to whether its ethical.

Try as much as you want MD, you can never transform a pickle back to a cucumber. IMO justice Thomas used the high tech lynching defense to make him the justice he is today. I think he has a lot of personal resentments towards alot of folks in charge in DC today. Y'all can complain about him until the cows come home but he is one of nine who is bullet proof.

Let's lose the "bulletproof" analogy, as unfortunately, no one is.

I think the odds of removal by impeachment or stepping down are below 1%, though that means the classic "you're saying I have a chance?" remains. Would need 16 R's, so ain't gonna happen....but this keeps getting worse and worse, so if actual criminal activity has happened, never know.

But I don't think claiming "high tech lynching" holds any sway any more, probably won't again in our lifetimes. Just a raw political power issue now.

That all said, I don't think ALL of the Justices are corrupt POS, indeed I expect most of them, maybe only with the exception of Alito, are deeply disturbed by this set of ethical revelations and what it means for their institution. Perhaps in varying degrees, I think there's likely some real self-reflection, both institutionally and personally, going on among the Justices and a desire to find a path that restores public trust.

Roberts seems to have failed that test in the immediate moment but I hold out some hope that as the revelations pile up he'll work with others to put in place a much more clear set of rules and consequences.

And meanwhile, the increased "sunlight" on specific transgressions is going to continue until that's pretty well exhausted and the Justices, at least most of them, will be trying to avoid such going forward...a good thing.

But if this all blows over and they galavant away as if nothing happened, that's incredibly bad for our democracy if not responded to electorally.

I'd expect it to matter in 2024 and beyond, ultimately with major Court reform insisted upon by a Congress heavily dominated by progressives. It won't be enough to simply appoint liberal Justices upon the death of the right wingers, they'll increase the size of the Court and hopefully institute ggaits wish of term limits.

Why so quick to lose the bulletproof analogy? There are 9 justices sitting in the SCOTUS that answer to no controlling legal authority. You seem to believe that reality is going to change. Justice Roberts refused to go in front of a Senate panel that wanted his chestnuts roasting on a roaring fire. Roberts may not like Thomas on many levels but he does have his back.

Because we live in a culture of gun violence in which a surprisingly large portion of Americans actually believe in the use of violence to achieve political aims.

ggait's "untouchable" word expresses just fine what you meant.

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?? How surprisingly large is the portion of Americans who profess violence as a solution?? I know a huge number of Americans who love their guns and yet have no intention of inciting or condoning random violence. You must be making this chit up as you go along? We also live in a country that loves drinking, smoking and gambling among other things.

I think 1 in 4 is a "surprisingly large portion". Shocking, really.

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/31/10768731 ... times-okay

WAPO survey had it 1 in 3, in Jan 2022, but Guardian poll at 1 in 5 June 2022.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... ified-poll

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... nce-survey

All are "surprisingly large" in my book.

Don't like those publications, https://nypost.com/2022/01/02/34-percen ... justified/

538 summed it up: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... -violence/

Note that the polls indicate a larger % of Republicans agree that violence is sometimes justified for important political aims, than Dems...but independents are close to GOP.

I don't see a breakdown between gun owners and non gun owners, but there has been research done on the threat of gun violence toward public officials from about 40% of threats mentioning guns in 2016 (yikes!) to over 60% now. And the number of threats has grown hugely overall against public officials.
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/report/t ... -violence/

And the amount of actual politically motivated gun violence is way up as well...any is alarming.

So, maybe before you assume I'm "making chit up" trying using the little google machine at your fingertips.

[cradleandshoot]

“The idea that Leonard Leo, who has a passionate ideological interest in how the court rules and who has worked hard for years to advance that interest, could pick up the phone and generate substantial compensation to Virginia Thomas, which also benefits Clarence Thomas — that idea is bad for the country, the court and the rule of law,” Gillers said. “It’s not the way the Supreme Court should do its business or allow its business to be done.”

All they had to do was believe Anita Hill. She tried to tell us what a POS and immoral man we were dealing with......we didn't want to hear it, apparently.

Oh well. Nothing we can do now.

You're 100% right. Thomas neutered all of them then with the "high tech lynching" defense. Joe Biden, as chair of the Senate committee, is foremost to blame for cowering.

I'm sure a lot of Senators and former Senators regret their call on Thomas. Undoubtedly including Biden.

Decades before "me-too", sense of hope for more diversity on Court, etc.

But that's 3 decades ago...the issue is what do the current Senators do?
Even more importantly (hopefully) is the question as to whether the Court as a whole has the guts to make hard decisions when it comes to policing themselves. They should step up, but will they?

And then back to the Senators if they do not.

And then to voters...

Meanwhile, it remains disgraceful that Congress balks at its own regulation, stock trading etc.
But people did go to jail when they were found to have taken trips paid for by lobbyist Abramoff...it's not a close call as to whether its ethical.

Try as much as you want MD, you can never transform a pickle back to a cucumber. IMO justice Thomas used the high tech lynching defense to make him the justice he is today. I think he has a lot of personal resentments towards alot of folks in charge in DC today. Y'all can complain about him until the cows come home but he is one of nine who is bullet proof.

Let's lose the "bulletproof" analogy, as unfortunately, no one is.

I think the odds of removal by impeachment or stepping down are below 1%, though that means the classic "you're saying I have a chance?" remains. Would need 16 R's, so ain't gonna happen....but this keeps getting worse and worse, so if actual criminal activity has happened, never know.

But I don't think claiming "high tech lynching" holds any sway any more, probably won't again in our lifetimes. Just a raw political power issue now.

That all said, I don't think ALL of the Justices are corrupt POS, indeed I expect most of them, maybe only with the exception of Alito, are deeply disturbed by this set of ethical revelations and what it means for their institution. Perhaps in varying degrees, I think there's likely some real self-reflection, both institutionally and personally, going on among the Justices and a desire to find a path that restores public trust.

Roberts seems to have failed that test in the immediate moment but I hold out some hope that as the revelations pile up he'll work with others to put in place a much more clear set of rules and consequences.

And meanwhile, the increased "sunlight" on specific transgressions is going to continue until that's pretty well exhausted and the Justices, at least most of them, will be trying to avoid such going forward...a good thing.

But if this all blows over and they galavant away as if nothing happened, that's incredibly bad for our democracy if not responded to electorally.

I'd expect it to matter in 2024 and beyond, ultimately with major Court reform insisted upon by a Congress heavily dominated by progressives. It won't be enough to simply appoint liberal Justices upon the death of the right wingers, they'll increase the size of the Court and hopefully institute ggaits wish of term limits.

Why so quick to lose the bulletproof analogy? There are 9 justices sitting in the SCOTUS that answer to no controlling legal authority. You seem to believe that reality is going to change. Justice Roberts refused to go in front of a Senate panel that wanted his chestnuts roasting on a roaring fire. Roberts may not like Thomas on many levels but he does have his back.

Because we live in a culture of gun violence in which a surprisingly large portion of Americans actually believe in the use of violence to achieve political aims.

ggait's "untouchable" word expresses just fine what you meant.

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?? How surprisingly large is the portion of Americans who profess violence as a solution?? I know a huge number of Americans who love their guns and yet have no intention of inciting or condoning random violence. You must be making this chit up as you go along? We also live in a country that loves drinking, smoking and gambling among other things.

I think 1 in 4 is a "surprisingly large portion". Shocking, really.

https://www.npr.org/2022/01/31/10768731 ... times-okay

WAPO survey had it 1 in 3, in Jan 2022, but Guardian poll at 1 in 5 June 2022.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... ified-poll

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... nce-survey

All are "surprisingly large" in my book.

Don't like those publications, https://nypost.com/2022/01/02/34-percen ... justified/

538 summed it up: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/wh ... -violence/

Note that the polls indicate a larger % of Republicans agree that violence is sometimes justified for important political aims, than Dems...but independents are close to GOP.

I don't see a breakdown between gun owners and non gun owners, but there has been research done on the threat of gun violence toward public officials from about 40% of threats mentioning guns in 2016 (yikes!) to over 60% now. And the number of threats has grown hugely overall against public officials.
https://giffords.org/lawcenter/report/t ... -violence/

And the amount of actual politically motivated gun violence is way up as well...any is alarming.

So, maybe before you assume I'm "making chit up" trying using the little google machine at your fingertips.

There is a huge difference between advocating violence and theoretically supporting it in some cockamamie poll. You own shotguns and enjoy hunting ducks. That must make you a threat to the country because well...you own guns and enjoy blasting ducks from the sky. So I can safely conclude you sir are a threat to the country. FTR MD I don't make chit up from some Google machine at my finger tips. I do my own reading just like you do and just like you do I come to my own conclusions. You just have a difficult time understanding that some people don't come to the same conclusions that you do. There is nothing wrong with that. As a matter of fact having a difference of opinion is a good thing. Of course there is always the fact that you think people should be lock step in what you believe. Hell there are even rare occasions when I agree with you. Those rare occasions are becoming fewer and farther between the more radical your opinions keep getting. I'm more concerned about the violence and crime emanating from our cities and towns every night. Your concerned about the hypothetical threat from Christian white supremacists. Those idiots that stormed the capital on Jan.6 were nothing more than a bunch of hooligans who more resembles the rabid soccer fans of Europe. Any group of ideologues who want to butt heads with the unlimited power of the US government is going to get their ass handed to them on a platter. I think most people with any common sense understand that fact very well.

[Jim Malone]

I don't care which side of aisle one is in; it seems to me that all three branches of government have conducted themselves with quite the contrary of honor and integrity.

The monies reportedly being generated by these folk and spouses outside of their career choice is outrageous.

Oldest daughter had an interview with Justice Thomas during Junior year internship for writing in DC. She was attending College of The Holy Cross as he did a long time ago.

After doing her research on him she barely wanted to do the interview, let alone be in chambers alone with him.

She wrote the article after getting the interview being the person she is.

[cradleandshoot]

Thomas is of course untouchable. Life tenured SCOTUS judge subject to basically zero ethics guidelines.

Only remove-able via impeachment. Which wouldn't happen even if he shot someone on 5th Avenue.

Best we can do is shame the judges into self-regulating, at least to the extent of disclosure.

Sunlight's a pretty good disinfectant. You think Harlan Crow is going to continue to gravy train Thomas now that he knows the press is going to be all over that stuff? This dreck primarily breeds in the darkness.

Crow is a mega billionaire, I doubt as wealthy and as old as he is that could give a rats rear end about what anybody thinks of him. If I was in his shoes negative publicity would mean zippo to me.

[ggait]

Thomas is of course untouchable. Life tenured SCOTUS judge subject to basically zero ethics guidelines.

Only remove-able via impeachment. Which wouldn't happen even if he shot someone on 5th Avenue.

Best we can do is shame the judges into self-regulating, at least to the extent of disclosure.

Sunlight's a pretty good disinfectant. You think Harlan Crow is going to continue to gravy train Thomas now that he knows the press is going to be all over that stuff? This dreck primarily breeds in the darkness.

Cool beaners counselor.There are 8 SCOTUS justices that now need to have their private lives and conversations on social media looked at with fine tooth comb.

Absolutely. If they don't like it, then resign. Which they can do and still get full lifetime guaranteed pay fyi.

Every single federal judge in the USA is subject to these rules. Just not these nine forking sancitmonious pettifogging weasel a-holes. Impeach all of them right now and start over. With term limts.

[ggait]

Crow is a mega billionaire, I doubt as wealthy and as old as he is that could give a rats rear end about what anybody thinks of him. If I was in his shoes negative publicity would mean zippo to me.

I will bet you unlimited dollars that Clarence will not be mega-yacht sailing this summer. Why?

Because Crow knows that intrepid reporters are now monitoring his plane and yacht movements on a daily basis. Which is so very easy to do. This shirt only works if you can do it on the down low.

Sorry Clarence. Back to parking the RV at Walmart.

[cradleandshoot]

GOP donor paid private school tuition for Justice Thomas’s grandnephew, report says

By John Wagner
Updated May 4, 2023 at 11:18 a.m. EDT|Published May 4, 2023 at 8:33 a.m. EDT

The same Texas billionaire who treated Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to lavish vacations paid private boarding school tuition for Thomas’s grandnephew, a boy the justice has said he raised as a son, according to a new report that said Thomas did not disclose the payments.

ProPublica reported that Harlan Crow, a prominent Republican donor, paid tuition at Hidden Lake Academy, a boarding school in Georgia, as well as at Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia, for Mark Martin. Thomas had legal custody of the boy.

The publication cited a bank statement that showed Crow paid $6,200 in monthly tuition at Hidden Lake Academy in July 2009. Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school, was quoted as saying that Crow “picked up the tab” for the entire time Martin was a student there, about a year. Grimwood also told ProPublica that Crow told him that he paid tuition as well for Martin at Randolph-Macon Academy, which Martin attended both before and after his time at Hidden Lake Academy.

No big deal. Roberts says they can police themselves.

All the Court possesses to create, buttress and continue its institutional legitimacy is the appearance that the Court's component members are committed to the rule of law, and free of abiding prejudices and biases. In my lifetime, the decision not to carry out a proper and expeditious confirmation process on Garland, the circus of Kavanaugh's confirmation, the rush through of the confirmation of ACB, and the revelation of the scope of Thomas's partisanship and succour from the right have basically killed this institution. Roberts: we have always thought he was an institution first kind of actor. He is now at the Rubicon.

There is no bottom for Republican voters. Where the F is the outrage? They don't care. Little D's and R's........tell us more about Hunter's laptop, and how it's important that our government isn't for sale.

Our country continues to circle the drain----if you're a Registered Republican and haven't sent one simple email to your two Senators, as well as your Rep sharing your outrage? This is on you. If you have....good on you, and thanks.

This would NEVER have been allowed by Republican voters or leaders when I was a kid. Its what I liked about them and their party.

Those days are SO long gone.

I postulated whether we were seeing the beginnings of the fall of the American empire a few years ago…..I got a ton of pushback…..doesn’t seem so crazy now. The signs were there. It’s remarkable that most people are asleep. The peasantry doesn’t care…..

The peasants can revolt at the ballot box. That is the only option available to them. The mistaken belief is that party D will do things different than party R and vice versa. At the end of the day nothing changes except the party in charge. How true is it that absolute power corrupts absolutely. How many people are elected to serve this nation and arrive in DC without 2 nickels and a pot to pee in. Funny how within a decade or less they often become very wealthy while serving their country.

[cradleandshoot]

Crow is a mega billionaire, I doubt as wealthy and as old as he is that could give a rats rear end about what anybody thinks of him. If I was in his shoes negative publicity would mean zippo to me.

I will bet you unlimited dollars that Clarence will not be mega-yacht sailing this summer. Why?

Because Crow knows that intrepid reporters are now monitoring his plane and yacht movements on a daily basis. Which is so very easy to do. This shirt only works if you can do it on the down low.

Sorry Clarence. Back to parking the RV at Walmart.

There is always a train trip through the swiss alps. Maybe Crow can consult with Rick Steves on a vacation to the French Riviera? Maybe if those intrepid reporters could get some pics of Clarence and Ginny sunbathing nude on a beach. That site would probably burn their retinas out.

[Typical Lax Dad]

GOP donor paid private school tuition for Justice Thomas’s grandnephew, report says

By John Wagner
Updated May 4, 2023 at 11:18 a.m. EDT|Published May 4, 2023 at 8:33 a.m. EDT

The same Texas billionaire who treated Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to lavish vacations paid private boarding school tuition for Thomas’s grandnephew, a boy the justice has said he raised as a son, according to a new report that said Thomas did not disclose the payments.

ProPublica reported that Harlan Crow, a prominent Republican donor, paid tuition at Hidden Lake Academy, a boarding school in Georgia, as well as at Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia, for Mark Martin. Thomas had legal custody of the boy.

The publication cited a bank statement that showed Crow paid $6,200 in monthly tuition at Hidden Lake Academy in July 2009. Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school, was quoted as saying that Crow “picked up the tab” for the entire time Martin was a student there, about a year. Grimwood also told ProPublica that Crow told him that he paid tuition as well for Martin at Randolph-Macon Academy, which Martin attended both before and after his time at Hidden Lake Academy.

No big deal. Roberts says they can police themselves.

All the Court possesses to create, buttress and continue its institutional legitimacy is the appearance that the Court's component members are committed to the rule of law, and free of abiding prejudices and biases. In my lifetime, the decision not to carry out a proper and expeditious confirmation process on Garland, the circus of Kavanaugh's confirmation, the rush through of the confirmation of ACB, and the revelation of the scope of Thomas's partisanship and succour from the right have basically killed this institution. Roberts: we have always thought he was an institution first kind of actor. He is now at the Rubicon.

There is no bottom for Republican voters. Where the F is the outrage? They don't care. Little D's and R's........tell us more about Hunter's laptop, and how it's important that our government isn't for sale.

Our country continues to circle the drain----if you're a Registered Republican and haven't sent one simple email to your two Senators, as well as your Rep sharing your outrage? This is on you. If you have....good on you, and thanks.

This would NEVER have been allowed by Republican voters or leaders when I was a kid. Its what I liked about them and their party.

Those days are SO long gone.

I postulated whether we were seeing the beginnings of the fall of the American empire a few years ago…..I got a ton of pushback…..doesn’t seem so crazy now. The signs were there. It’s remarkable that most people are asleep. The peasantry doesn’t care…..

The peasants can revolt at the ballot box. That is the only option available to them. The mistaken belief is that party D will do things different than party R and vice versa. At the end of the day nothing changes except the party in charge. How true is it that absolute power corrupts absolutely. How many people are elected to serve this nation and arrive in DC without 2 nickels and a pot to pee in. Funny how within a decade or less they often become very wealthy while serving their country.

Other than agreeing to my suspicion, not sure what this has to do with what I postulated.

[cradleandshoot]

GOP donor paid private school tuition for Justice Thomas’s grandnephew, report says

By John Wagner
Updated May 4, 2023 at 11:18 a.m. EDT|Published May 4, 2023 at 8:33 a.m. EDT

The same Texas billionaire who treated Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to lavish vacations paid private boarding school tuition for Thomas’s grandnephew, a boy the justice has said he raised as a son, according to a new report that said Thomas did not disclose the payments.

ProPublica reported that Harlan Crow, a prominent Republican donor, paid tuition at Hidden Lake Academy, a boarding school in Georgia, as well as at Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia, for Mark Martin. Thomas had legal custody of the boy.

The publication cited a bank statement that showed Crow paid $6,200 in monthly tuition at Hidden Lake Academy in July 2009. Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school, was quoted as saying that Crow “picked up the tab” for the entire time Martin was a student there, about a year. Grimwood also told ProPublica that Crow told him that he paid tuition as well for Martin at Randolph-Macon Academy, which Martin attended both before and after his time at Hidden Lake Academy.

No big deal. Roberts says they can police themselves.

All the Court possesses to create, buttress and continue its institutional legitimacy is the appearance that the Court's component members are committed to the rule of law, and free of abiding prejudices and biases. In my lifetime, the decision not to carry out a proper and expeditious confirmation process on Garland, the circus of Kavanaugh's confirmation, the rush through of the confirmation of ACB, and the revelation of the scope of Thomas's partisanship and succour from the right have basically killed this institution. Roberts: we have always thought he was an institution first kind of actor. He is now at the Rubicon.

There is no bottom for Republican voters. Where the F is the outrage? They don't care. Little D's and R's........tell us more about Hunter's laptop, and how it's important that our government isn't for sale.

Our country continues to circle the drain----if you're a Registered Republican and haven't sent one simple email to your two Senators, as well as your Rep sharing your outrage? This is on you. If you have....good on you, and thanks.

This would NEVER have been allowed by Republican voters or leaders when I was a kid. Its what I liked about them and their party.

Those days are SO long gone.

I postulated whether we were seeing the beginnings of the fall of the American empire a few years ago…..I got a ton of pushback…..doesn’t seem so crazy now. The signs were there. It’s remarkable that most people are asleep. The peasantry doesn’t care…..

The peasants can revolt at the ballot box. That is the only option available to them. The mistaken belief is that party D will do things different than party R and vice versa. At the end of the day nothing changes except the party in charge. How true is it that absolute power corrupts absolutely. How many people are elected to serve this nation and arrive in DC without 2 nickels and a pot to pee in. Funny how within a decade or less they often become very wealthy while serving their country.

Other than agreeing to my suspicion, not sure what this has to do with what I postulated.

When did Rome finally come to the conclusion their empire was crumbling around them? You postulated that our country is beginning to crumble. In one form or another those sentiments have been around since the early 1960s. You could right, maybe this nation is no worthy of greatness, that's what everybody keeps saying.