Clarence Thomas accepted more gifts from rich benefactors, new report says

[rightwinger]

None of Thomas’s billionaire friends were friends before he became a Supreme Court Justice.

He did not grow up with them, go to school with them, live nearby

All wanted him around once he put on the Robe

 

[rightwinger]

.




None of which you, shitslinger, can prove.

As usual.

Go write some more award winning fiction.




.

Actually
They can all be proved and Thomas is not denying them

 

[2aguy]

The leftist attack machine trying to take out Thomas is large, vicious, dishonest, and active.

I'm pretty sure every single Supreme Court justice has accepted gifts from friends and/or admirers. Certainly all have wealthy and influential friends. Isn't it interesting that there is zero interest in investigating the other eight justices to see what gifts they have received from their friends?

The only problem would be if one of these friends had a case affecting them before the Court and Thomas did not recuse himself. Such a circumstance has never come up.

Thomas's fellow justices, all who at one time or another have disagreed with Thomas, seem to have no problem with him personally. I especially appreciated Justice Sotomayor's comments about her colleague:

Sotomayor praises Clarence Thomas: ‘He is a man who cares deeply about the court as an institution’

Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor spoke highly of colleague Justice Clarence Thomas during an event on Thursday, saying, “He is a man who cares deeply about the court as an institution.” Sotoma…

thehill.com

Is she the leftist who had 3 million from a publisher while she was ruling on a case they were involved in or was that Kagan...

 

[OhPleaseJustQuit]

Actually
They can all be proved and Thomas is not denying them

.




I didn't ask IF they could be proved.

For an award winning writer, you are not very observant.




.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Supreme court justice Thomas took 38 undisclosed vacations from rich friends – report

Supreme court justice may have violated US law by not disclosing trips paid for by wealthy friends, ethics experts say

www.theguardian.com

38 holidays paid for !!
When did he have time to get round to doing any judging ?
It can be argued that the donors got a good return on their investment in this character.
But its starting to look like the American legal system is more corrupt than its political system. Something I would have not thought possible.

"Deploy the Deflector Shields, full force!"
"Aye, Captain Commie!"

 

[Foxfyre]

Accepting a Christmas Present is different than accepting free vacations, private jet use, membership at exclusive clubs

Living the lifestyle of a Billionaire while claiming impartiality are not consistent

Again where is the investigation to see what gifts other justices have received? Who their friends are? What lifestyle they lead?

Clarence Thomas has served on the high court for 32 years and his net worth is little more than it was when he was confirmed to the high court. He is one of the least affluent justices with a net worth of about $1 million, most of which is tied up in his home a couple of other pieces of real estate he owns. He hardly is profiting from his position in government.

So if he enjoys a few perks by more affluent friends who enjoy his and Ginni's company, power to him. My husband and I are less affluent that many of our friends and relatives and enjoy things they can offer us that we could not or would not provide for ourselves. We are grateful for their generosity but they have never made any requests or applied pressure on us about ANYTHING in return for the gifts they give. We in turn do kindnesses for them too. It's what friends do for friends.

Thomas has not been accused of not recusing himself re any of those friends and his colleagues respect him. So those of you participating in the politically motivated smear machine can just go fly a kite. Your criticisms have no merit or validity.

Is she the leftist who had 3 million from a publisher while she was ruling on a case they were involved in or was that Kagan...

Sotomayor is one of the wealthier Supreme Court justices if not the wealthiest, and she has published four books over the years. I don't know about the case you are referring. Kagan was criticized for not recusing herself from a healthcare reform decision that she had previously been involved with.

Sotomayor does come across to me as a good egg though I disagree with her on pretty much all her sociopolitical positions.

 

[jbrownson0831]

Again where is the investigation to see what gifts other justices have received? Who their friends are? What lifestyle they lead?

Clarence Thomas has served on the high court for 32 years and his net worth is little more than it was when he was confirmed to the high court. He is one of the least affluent justices with a net worth of about $1 million, most of which is tied up in his home a couple of other pieces of real estate he owns. He hardly is profiting from his position in government.

So if he enjoys a few perks by more affluent friends who enjoy his and Ginni's company, power to him. My husband and I are less affluent that many of our friends and relatives and enjoy things they can offer us that we could not or would not provide for ourselves. We are grateful for their generosity but they have never made any requests or applied pressure on us about ANYTHING in return for the gifts they give. We in turn do kindnesses for them too. It's what friends do for friends.

Thomas has not been accused of not recusing himself re any of those friends and his colleagues respect him. So those of you participating in the politically motivated smear machine can just go fly a kite. Your criticisms have no merit or validity.

Sotomayor is one of the wealthier Supreme Court justices if not the wealthiest, and she has published four books over the years. I don't know about the case you are referring. Kagan was criticized for not recusing herself from a healthcare reform decision that she had previously been involved with.

Sotomayor does come across to me as a good egg though I disagree with her on pretty much all her sociopolitical positions.

Commie is running out of deflection targets....
next he is telling us about Nikki Haley's free oil change from the car dealership...

 

[rightwinger]

Clarence Thomas has served on the high court for 32 years and his net worth is little more than it was when he was confirmed to the high court. He is one of the least affluent justices with a net worth of about $1 million,

Yet he is able to live an affluent lifestyle through his friends
Private jets, luxury boxes, elite golf clubs, private yachts

Nothing illegal but highly unethical

As a minimum he should have to report these gifts and from who to see if there is a conflict of interest

 

[Foxfyre]

Commie is running out of deflection targets....
next he is telling us about Nikki Haley's free oil change from the car dealership...

Well the thing is Crow and Thomas have been besties for a very long time. So if Crow invites Thomas to spend time on his yacht or fly with him in his private jet or join him in his box seats at a sporting event, I see absolutely nothing wrong with that. Most especially when Thomas's financial disclosures show that he is profiting in no way other than enjoying a good time.

I had a very wealthy good friend in Kansas who often flew me places in their private plane. She enjoyed doing it and I enjoyed the favor very much. She profited from it in no way whatsoever, but she was a special person that I admired very much. Another wealthy friend more of family members than us offers us free use of their very fine mountain cabin bordering on the Pecos River. Other friends now oil rich multi-millionaires that we have known all our adult lives also treat us to special things we could never afford for ourselves.

But if the wealthy cannot give gifts to and/or invite those they love and/or enjoy spending time with without somebody accusing them or their guests of some sort of graft, bribery, special favors, etc., what a miserable empty life many of the wealthy would lead.

 

[Foxfyre]

Yet he is able to live an affluent lifestyle through his friends
Private jets, luxury boxes, elite golf clubs, private yachts

Nothing illegal but highly unethical

As a minimum he should have to report these gifts and from who to see if there is a conflict of interest

See my post #29

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

Congress must create a Code of Ethics for SCOTUS with its jurisdiction withdrawn for the legislation, and signed by the President.

 

[Marener]

But if the wealthy cannot give gifts to and/or invite those they love and/or enjoy spending time with without somebody accusing them or their guests of some sort of graft, bribery, special favors, etc., what a miserable empty life many of the wealthy would lead.

The double standards here are astounding.

Clarence Thomas just so happens to have gotten all these billionaire “friends” since being on the Supreme Court.

Totally normal. Couldn’t possibly have anything to do with being a Supreme Court Justice.

 

[rightwinger]

But if the wealthy cannot give gifts to and/or invite those they love and/or enjoy spending time with without somebody accusing them or their guests of some sort of graft, bribery, special favors, etc., what a miserable empty life many of the wealthy would lead.

I worked for DoD for over 30 years and I had to take Ethics Training once a year.
One thing that was stressed was not just doing something that was improper but the “appearance”of impropriety.
You do not want to appear to be compromised whether you are or not.

When I first started working for the Government, I could not even accept a cup of coffee from a defense contractor without putting a quarter in the cup

Those rules were later relaxed but I would never accept anything from a Defense Contractor whether it was a meal or sports tickets that “they were not using“. I would not even socialize with them after hours because it might not look right.

Thomas is unquestionably compromised. Even if they are “just his friends”, he is accepting gifts of great value from large political donors without reporting them. I had to decline such offers when I worked for the Government, so should Thomas.

 

[2aguy]

Congress must create a Code of Ethics for SCOTUS with its jurisdiction withdrawn for the legislation, and signed by the President.

As Alito stated they cant.....the Court is a Co-equal branch and nothing in the Comstitution outside of impeachment is possible

 

[rightwinger]

As Alito stated they cant.....the Court is a Co-equal branch and nothing in the Comstitution outside of impeachment is possible

Then the Roberts Court is in a quandary
If they refuse to Police themselves, their actions will compromise the integrity of their court.
The Supreme Court was always looked at as ethical and unbiased regardless of whether they are Conservative or Liberal.
If their personal lives are impacting their standing as Judges, they need to do something. It should not be decided by individual judges whether they are compromised or not.

 

[Cougarbear]

What should be looked at is if his vote made a difference.
Did his single vote sway the decision one way or the other.

According to the far left justice Sotomayor, no. There is no evidence, emails, letters or anything to base your accusations.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

As Alito stated they cant.....the Court is a Co-equal branch and nothing in the Comstitution outside of impeachment is possible

The Court can opine all it wants, but the legislation will include a section that withdraws SCOTUS authority to review the legislation.

Go read your Constitution.

 

[22lcidw]

Congress must create a Code of Ethics for SCOTUS with its jurisdiction withdrawn for the legislation, and signed by the President.

Would this be after they create a Code of Ethics for themselves? And the term limits. Oh, the term limits.

 

[John Edgar Slow Horses]

"Congress holds the power to create (and, implicitly, to define the jurisdiction of) federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court (i.e. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and various other Article I and Article III tribunals). This court-creating power is granted both in the congressional powers clause (Art. I, § 8, Cl. 9) and in the judicial vesting clause (Art. III, § 1). Second, Congress has the power to make exceptions to and regulations of the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This court-limiting power is granted in the Exceptions Clause (Art. III, § 2). By exercising these powers in concert, Congress may effectively eliminate any judicial review of certain federal legislative or executive actions and of certain state actions, or alternatively transfer the judicial review responsibility to state courts by "knocking [federal courts] ... out of the game."[1]"

Jurisdiction stripping - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[2aguy]

"Congress holds the power to create (and, implicitly, to define the jurisdiction of) federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court (i.e. Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and various other Article I and Article III tribunals). This court-creating power is granted both in the congressional powers clause (Art. I, § 8, Cl. 9) and in the judicial vesting clause (Art. III, § 1). Second, Congress has the power to make exceptions to and regulations of the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. This court-limiting power is granted in the Exceptions Clause (Art. III, § 2). By exercising these powers in concert, Congress may effectively eliminate any judicial review of certain federal legislative or executive actions and of certain state actions, or alternatively transfer the judicial review responsibility to state courts by "knocking [federal courts] ... out of the game."[1]"

Jurisdiction stripping - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Yeah...again, they dont have the authority to create ethics rules for the court the Coequal branch