What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

The Rot In The Supreme Court Goes Beyond Clarence And Ginni Thomas

berg80

Platinum Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2017
Messages
9,797
Reaction score
6,385
Points
970
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday temporarily blocked a subpoena demanding testimony from South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham from a Georgia grand jury investigating election interference by former President Donald Trump.

The hold on the subpoena came three days after Graham’s attorneys asked Thomas to delay the senator’s appearance before the grand jury, which is investigating possible criminal interference in Georgia’s presidential election in 2020.

On Thursday, a panel of judges on the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously rejected a request by Graham to temporarily block the subpoena, which calls for the senator to testify on Nov. 17 in an Atlanta courthouse.


Obviously, Clarence should recuse himself from any case having to do with the attempted coup since his wife was in favor of it.
These conservative SC justices refusal to recuse when conflicts of interest arise has become normalized. Corruption has been normalized.........just like during the 4 years of Individual 1's reign of terror.
 

Lesh

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 21, 2016
Messages
49,592
Reaction score
21,814
Points
2,300
Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas on Monday temporarily blocked a subpoena demanding testimony from South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham from a Georgia grand jury investigating election interference by former President Donald Trump.

The hold on the subpoena came three days after Graham’s attorneys asked Thomas to delay the senator’s appearance before the grand jury, which is investigating possible criminal interference in Georgia’s presidential election in 2020.

On Thursday, a panel of judges on the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals unanimously rejected a request by Graham to temporarily block the subpoena, which calls for the senator to testify on Nov. 17 in an Atlanta courthouse.


Obviously, Clarence should recuse himself from any case having to do with the attempted coup since his wife was in favor of it.
Obviously. He has no business ruling on anything to do with Trump or Jan 6
 

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
17,637
Reaction score
17,582
Points
2,288
Location
Now a resident of a Red state! Hallelujah!
These conservative SC justices refusal to recuse when conflicts of interest arise
Except, you forget the major premise. There is zero conflict of interest here.
has become normalized. Corruption has been normalized.........just like during the 4 years of Individual 1's reign of terror.
Nice ^ babbling bullshit. 🙄
 

Rye Catcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
11,847
Reaction score
7,080
Points
940
No ma’am. The biggest lies come from you brain damaged and generally incoherent libtards.

When an absolute asshole such as you accuses the judge of being “biased,” all reasonable people immediately recognize that you’re just wetting your panties because the judge didn’t rule the way you wanted. Boo hoo, ya sissy.
Your vile and vulgar words are foolish, lack substance, not thoughtful or even thought provoking; the facts of fighting words do not offend me.
 

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
17,637
Reaction score
17,582
Points
2,288
Location
Now a resident of a Red state! Hallelujah!
Your vile and vulgar words are foolish, lack substance, not thoughtful or even thought provoking; the facts of fighting words do not offend me.
Yeah yeah. You’re so indifferent to the “vulgar” words that you found it necessary to respond exclusively about those words while ignoring the point.

Fuck off, Fly Catcher. You’re a transparent fraud.
 

Rye Catcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
11,847
Reaction score
7,080
Points
940
Nah, bitch. You got triggered and now you’re projecting. Again. 😎
"Hah, bitch"?
Typical of a misogynistic bigot in the trump era.
 

Flash

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2014
Messages
56,444
Reaction score
43,707
Points
3,645
Location
Florida
The rot in the Supreme Court are those two stupid dingbats The Worthless Negro appointed and that dumbass affirmative action Negro bitch Potatohead appointed.
 

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
17,637
Reaction score
17,582
Points
2,288
Location
Now a resident of a Red state! Hallelujah!
"Hah, bitch"?
Typical of a misogynistic bigot in the trump era.
You can’t even quote it correctly. You’re a joke, you dishonest hack bitch libtard.

And calling you a hitch has not a thing in the world to do with misogyny. Just exactly how fucking retarded are you, anyway?

BACK ON TOPIC:

Since you’ve managed to wander off the reservation, Fly Fucker, let me remind you that the thread topic is: the alleged “rot” in SCOTUS.

To be concise: there is none. And not a shred of support for the vapid OP claim has been offered.
 

Rye Catcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
11,847
Reaction score
7,080
Points
940
Yeah yeah. You’re so indifferent to the “vulgar” words that you found it necessary to respond exclusively about those words while ignoring the point.

Fuck off, Fly Catcher. You’re a transparent fraud.
"Fuck off, Fly Catcher" is a clear and concise example of what you respond to, as noted in post 124. Your words are not transparent, they are clear of someone who cannot write an expository essay and needs to post, "Nice ^ babbling bullshit"! Trying to insult those who speak the truth, something you lack and is not part of your soul.
 

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
17,637
Reaction score
17,582
Points
2,288
Location
Now a resident of a Red state! Hallelujah!
"Fuck off, Fly Catcher" is a clear and concise example of what you respond to, as noted in post 124. Your words are not transparent, they are clear of someone who cannot write an expository essay and needs to post, "Nice ^ babbling bullshit"! Trying to insult those who speak the truth, something you lack and is not part of your soul.
You are awfully triggered, Fly Fucker. You are far from an example of someone who speaks any truth.

And, yet again, of course, you’re off topic.

Let’s try again, you silly hack.

Ginny is permitted to have and express any damn political opinion she wishes. That does nothing on Earth to even remotely suggest that her husband, the SCOTUS Justice, needs to recuse himself from any case including ones on the very topic of his wife’s opinions.

Can you manage to post on topic, now, you whining pussy?

Unlikely, I know.
 

Rye Catcher

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2019
Messages
11,847
Reaction score
7,080
Points
940
You can’t even quote it correctly. You’re a joke, you dishonest hack bitch libtard.

And calling you a hitch has not a thing in the world to do with misogyny. Just exactly how fucking retarded are you, anyway?

BACK ON TOPIC:

Since you’ve managed to wander off the reservation, Fly Fucker, let me remind you that the thread topic is: the alleged “rot” in SCOTUS.

To be concise: there is none. And not a shred of support for the vapid OP claim has been offered.
"You can’t even quote it correctly. You’re a joke, you dishonest hack bitch libtard."

An example of a type error that is proof you are a fascist, both in political reality - Trumpism - and as noted by a typing error.

Leading to another ad hominem not based on facts or reality.
 

BackAgain

Neutronium Member & truth speaker #StopBrandon
Joined
Nov 11, 2021
Messages
17,637
Reaction score
17,582
Points
2,288
Location
Now a resident of a Red state! Hallelujah!
"You can’t even quote it correctly. You’re a joke, you dishonest hack bitch libtard."

An example of a type error that is proof you are a fascist, both in political reality - Trumpism - and as noted by a typing error.

Ho hum. More pathetic deflection. And still willfully off topic. No surprise.
Leading to another ad hominem not based on facts or reality.
False. But still willfully off topic.

Apparently, Fly Catcher has recognized his own obvious inability to address the topic.
 

jbrownson0831

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2020
Messages
14,939
Reaction score
12,759
Points
2,288
More than a decade ago, Ginni Thomas’s political activities drew scrutiny to her more public husband. More to the point, the failure of that husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, to declare decades of his wife’s income from that political activity drew attention, resulting in him revising 20 years’ worth of financial disclosure forms. That included $686,589 she earned between 2003 and 2007 from the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank.

The Thomases are the most enduringly egregious examples of why there needs to be not just an expansion of the Supreme Court, but real reforms that include finally making the court comply with a code of ethics—just like every other branch of the judiciary is compelled to do. But the Thomases are definitely not the only Supreme culprits in fishy spousal entanglements.

Meet Jesse M. Barrett and Jane Roberts, spouses to Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts, and subject to a deep investigative dive by Politico


The court has no credibility. It is corrupt beyond any repair. Nothing less than the impeachment of Thomas, Barret, and Roberts will suffice. Replacing those three corrupt individuals with Justices that understand they are not there to protect corporate interests, or rule in their own best interests, is the only actions that can restore the peoples faith in the court.
Awwww here's a tissue skewey. You are starting to sound really desperate now.
 

bripat9643

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2011
Messages
159,375
Reaction score
41,608
Points
2,180
More than a decade ago, Ginni Thomas’s political activities drew scrutiny to her more public husband. More to the point, the failure of that husband, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, to declare decades of his wife’s income from that political activity drew attention, resulting in him revising 20 years’ worth of financial disclosure forms. That included $686,589 she earned between 2003 and 2007 from the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank.

The Thomases are the most enduringly egregious examples of why there needs to be not just an expansion of the Supreme Court, but real reforms that include finally making the court comply with a code of ethics—just like every other branch of the judiciary is compelled to do. But the Thomases are definitely not the only Supreme culprits in fishy spousal entanglements.

Meet Jesse M. Barrett and Jane Roberts, spouses to Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts, and subject to a deep investigative dive by Politico


The court has no credibility. It is corrupt beyond any repair. Nothing less than the impeachment of Thomas, Barret, and Roberts will suffice. Replacing those three corrupt individuals with Justices that understand they are not there to protect corporate interests, or rule in their own best interests, is the only actions that can restore the peoples faith in the court.
American-Staffordshire-Terrier.20191216200722717-500x486.jpg
 

💲 Amazon Deals 💲

New Topics

Forum List

Top