There can be no hint of a Supreme Court Justice being bought.
Chances are that they are long time friends of similar viewpoint.
It doesn't matter, Thomas needs to resign. I've had vendors offer me all kinds of shit from trips to TV's to rounds of golf. I lived a clean career. My career depended upon it.
Why do I have to do this and Clarence Thomas does not?
He's definitely bought and paid for
Who paid for Kavanaughs debt as well
I vaguely remember that Kavanaugh was broke or had slot if credit card debt. I found this. WTF? How does someone in debt do this. My kids are in better financial shape. They don’t blow money
The 2017 snapshot also would appear to imply that Kavanaugh had managed to pay off the substantial credit card debts he reported in his 2016 disclosure or paid the debts down enough that he wasn’t required to report the details. In 2016, he had $60,000 to $200,000 in debt that he reportedly accrued largely by purchasing baseball tickets for himself and his friends to Washington Nationals games.
There can be no hint of a Supreme Court Justice being bought.
Chances are that they are long time friends of similar viewpoint.
It doesn't matter, Thomas needs to resign. I've had vendors offer me all kinds of shit from trips to TV's to rounds of golf. I lived a clean career. My career depended upon it.
Why do I have to do this and Clarence Thomas does not?
They became friends like 3 years after he became a Supreme Court justice
There can be no hint of a Supreme Court Justice being bought.
Chances are that they are long time friends of similar viewpoint.
It doesn't matter, Thomas needs to resign. I've had vendors offer me all kinds of shit from trips to TV's to rounds of golf. I lived a clean career. My career depended upon it.
Why do I have to do this and Clarence Thomas does not?
They became friends like 3 years after he became a Supreme Court justice
Appointing Thomas was one of the dumbest things Bush I did, and he did alot of dumb things. During Bush I reign, he raised taxes on Americans more than any other President in the history of the U.S.
The Boston Herald ran a headline, "Mr. Big Spender". I cut it out and put it on the outer wall of my cube.
People paid to play under trump by going to his hotels and spending a bunch of money to get his time/ear lile the t mobile/sprint merger. He’s part of the swamp.
Appointing Thomas was one of the dumbest things Bush I did,
That's a revealing perspective. From the Constitution, pro-America view he's been a spectacular choice. From a progressive agenda activist view he's been a constant obstruction.
he did alot of dumb things. During Bush I reign, he raised taxes on Americans more than any other President in the history of the U.S.
More revealing perspective.
The Bush term (now fondly embraced by the left because it's a weapon) featured three key but significant events-
1. In response to the wild success and popularity of Reagan and big win in the 1st Bush election, dems originated a strategy led by Senate majority leader Tom Daschle (D-SD) to block every single Bush domestic effort. It was an expansion of the dem DOA strategy for Reagan budgets. Bush had no answer and his domestic leadership was severely dampened (ended).
2. Bush turned his attention to foreign policy (his background and strength). He was wildly successful including overseeing the collapse/restructuring of the Soviet states after the fall of the USSR.
3. In an effort to find some movement from the dems on domestic policy, he agreed to a budget "compromise" that included the huge tax hike mentioned above. It ended his presidency. 1. The "compromise" never materialized. The dems never conceded anything and capitalized on Bush's economy failure. 2. The tax hike rocked the economy and sent it into a tail spin, 3. Rocking his re-election chances. Repub voters revolted at the "read my lips" betrayal and how it pained the Reagan economic boom. Ross Perot became the repub choice (including my vote) in the next election.
The Bush tax increase was short-lived as Clinton immediately dwarfed it. That worsened the economy and led to the rise of Newt's Contract with America. Clinton responded by conceding "you know what? I think I raised taxes too much, too...." and agreed to big tax cuts along with welfare reform and several other key repub policy objectives. The economy recovered and Clinton was re-elected.
Trump talked a big game but failed to deploy the big stick. He was hampered by the deep state swamp (recall Shumer's scoop that the intel agencies would target him) and state Party media attacks. He actually allowed the swamp to get bigger and stronger. Contrast that with team Biden and Obama before, giving the finger to the Constitution and simply imposing a fascist/dictator authoritative government. Now, again, Trump is campaigning on taking down the swamp.
Pro-Americans want, and will vote for that. But what evidence does Trump have to support his claims that he's the guy?
Post by EPIC Sir Tinley on Apr 16, 2023 6:14:33 GMT -8
Behind the left’s utterly bogus bid to take down Clarence Thomas
The manufactured “scandal” of Justice Clarence Thomas’ relationship with philanthropist Harlan Crow unites two of the left’s chief bigotries today — a hatred of black conservatives and a hatred of billionaires.
Given the left’s relentless attacks on Thomas ever since bogus sexual-harassment charges failed to derail his confirmation back in 1991, the only surprise is that it took so long to come up with this angle.
Last week, ProPublica, a self-described “independent, non-profit investigative journalism” organization funded by left-wing philanthropists aligned with the Democratic Party, broke the story that Thomas has accepted numerous flights and trips on Crow’s private jet and luxury yacht, as well as annual vacations with Crow at Crow’s summer retreat in New York’s Adirondacks.
Most of these trips were not disclosed as the Supreme Court’s disclosure rules exempt personal hospitality — and, as anyone who knows Harlan Crow recognizes, his extensive hospitality to a great many people is central to his life.
Nonetheless, various government “ethics” experts have denounced Thomas for exploiting a “loophole.”
ProPublica went to enormous lengths to learn the details of Thomas’ relationship with Crow, scouring flight records and interviewing yacht crews and resort staff that have worked for or near Crow’s holdings.
That’s a standard modus operandi for ProPublica. Its last big “scoop” was revealing very specific details of the income-tax returns for the 15 highest-income Americans, including Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg — details that came from a “leak” from inside the IRS that ProPublica failed to mention constituted a felony.
(The IRS leaker has still not been found.)
ProPublica also dinged Thomas for not reporting the sale of a property to a company linked to Crow, who says he bought it in order to preserve it for posterity.
The entire payment was for a whopping $133,363, of which Thomas had a one-third interest. Meanwhile, Joe Biden gets a pass for dubious real-estate deals involving many multiples of that sum.
There is a clear pattern to ProPublica’s “independent” journalism.
As is well-known today, neither ProPublica nor any other media outlet (aside from the New York Post) has shown any interest in the swirling evidence of corruption by the Biden family, which includes banking interests purchasing residential property from then-Sen. Joe Biden during the years that Delaware’s banking industry was heavily lobbying Biden to “reform” bankruptcy laws in a manner more favorable to banking interests (which finally passed in 2007).
And let’s not get started on the media’s incuriosity about circumstantial evidence of widespread insider trading by members of Congress.
Nor does ProPublica find it germane to mention any other Supreme Court justices who’ve accepted private hospitality travel from wealthy individuals over the years.
Despite the insinuation of corruption, there’s a missing element in the breathless ProPublica smear job on Thomas and Crow: Even ProPublica admits “Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it.”
The best ProPublica can do is remark that “it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the justice’s views.”
This would be a laughable speculation if it wasn’t so stupid.
Anyone can read Thomas’ opinions, as well as his other public declarations in speeches and occasional articles, to see that he has a deep foundation for his jurisprudence.
The idea that a well-known philanthropist was changing Thomas’ jurisprudence through his hospitality is so ludicrous that only a leftist could believe it.
One of the left’s frequent attacks on Thomas for a long time was that he almost never asked a question during a Supreme Court hearing.
The racist subtext of this criticism was obvious, but branding him “Silent Thomas,” like the branding of “Silent Calvin Coolidge,” was an indirect way of saying he could be ignored, that his opinions and dissents needn’t be taken seriously.
Since the court changed its protocol for oral arguments during COVID and ended the rather rude free-for-all atmosphere that marked its hearings for decades, Thomas is suddenly speaking up much more often.
And as the senior-most justice by length of tenure on the court and flexing growing intellectual influence with the newer justices, he can no longer be ignored.
Hence the need for the left to try once again to destroy him by any means necessary.
Steven F. Hayward is a resident scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.
Behind the left’s utterly bogus bid to take down Clarence Thomas
The manufactured “scandal” of Justice Clarence Thomas’ relationship with philanthropist Harlan Crow unites two of the left’s chief bigotries today — a hatred of black conservatives and a hatred of billionaires.
Given the left’s relentless attacks on Thomas ever since bogus sexual-harassment charges failed to derail his confirmation back in 1991, the only surprise is that it took so long to come up with this angle.
Last week, ProPublica, a self-described “independent, non-profit investigative journalism” organization funded by left-wing philanthropists aligned with the Democratic Party, broke the story that Thomas has accepted numerous flights and trips on Crow’s private jet and luxury yacht, as well as annual vacations with Crow at Crow’s summer retreat in New York’s Adirondacks.
Most of these trips were not disclosed as the Supreme Court’s disclosure rules exempt personal hospitality — and, as anyone who knows Harlan Crow recognizes, his extensive hospitality to a great many people is central to his life.
Nonetheless, various government “ethics” experts have denounced Thomas for exploiting a “loophole.”
ProPublica went to enormous lengths to learn the details of Thomas’ relationship with Crow, scouring flight records and interviewing yacht crews and resort staff that have worked for or near Crow’s holdings.
That’s a standard modus operandi for ProPublica. Its last big “scoop” was revealing very specific details of the income-tax returns for the 15 highest-income Americans, including Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg — details that came from a “leak” from inside the IRS that ProPublica failed to mention constituted a felony.
(The IRS leaker has still not been found.)
ProPublica also dinged Thomas for not reporting the sale of a property to a company linked to Crow, who says he bought it in order to preserve it for posterity.
The entire payment was for a whopping $133,363, of which Thomas had a one-third interest. Meanwhile, Joe Biden gets a pass for dubious real-estate deals involving many multiples of that sum.
There is a clear pattern to ProPublica’s “independent” journalism.
As is well-known today, neither ProPublica nor any other media outlet (aside from the New York Post) has shown any interest in the swirling evidence of corruption by the Biden family, which includes banking interests purchasing residential property from then-Sen. Joe Biden during the years that Delaware’s banking industry was heavily lobbying Biden to “reform” bankruptcy laws in a manner more favorable to banking interests (which finally passed in 2007).
And let’s not get started on the media’s incuriosity about circumstantial evidence of widespread insider trading by members of Congress.
Nor does ProPublica find it germane to mention any other Supreme Court justices who’ve accepted private hospitality travel from wealthy individuals over the years.
Despite the insinuation of corruption, there’s a missing element in the breathless ProPublica smear job on Thomas and Crow: Even ProPublica admits “Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it.”
The best ProPublica can do is remark that “it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the justice’s views.”
This would be a laughable speculation if it wasn’t so stupid.
Anyone can read Thomas’ opinions, as well as his other public declarations in speeches and occasional articles, to see that he has a deep foundation for his jurisprudence.
The idea that a well-known philanthropist was changing Thomas’ jurisprudence through his hospitality is so ludicrous that only a leftist could believe it.
One of the left’s frequent attacks on Thomas for a long time was that he almost never asked a question during a Supreme Court hearing.
The racist subtext of this criticism was obvious, but branding him “Silent Thomas,” like the branding of “Silent Calvin Coolidge,” was an indirect way of saying he could be ignored, that his opinions and dissents needn’t be taken seriously.
Since the court changed its protocol for oral arguments during COVID and ended the rather rude free-for-all atmosphere that marked its hearings for decades, Thomas is suddenly speaking up much more often.
And as the senior-most justice by length of tenure on the court and flexing growing intellectual influence with the newer justices, he can no longer be ignored.
Hence the need for the left to try once again to destroy him by any means necessary.
Steven F. Hayward is a resident scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.
Behind the left’s utterly bogus bid to take down Clarence Thomas
The manufactured “scandal” of Justice Clarence Thomas’ relationship with philanthropist Harlan Crow unites two of the left’s chief bigotries today — a hatred of black conservatives and a hatred of billionaires.
Given the left’s relentless attacks on Thomas ever since bogus sexual-harassment charges failed to derail his confirmation back in 1991, the only surprise is that it took so long to come up with this angle.
Last week, ProPublica, a self-described “independent, non-profit investigative journalism” organization funded by left-wing philanthropists aligned with the Democratic Party, broke the story that Thomas has accepted numerous flights and trips on Crow’s private jet and luxury yacht, as well as annual vacations with Crow at Crow’s summer retreat in New York’s Adirondacks.
Most of these trips were not disclosed as the Supreme Court’s disclosure rules exempt personal hospitality — and, as anyone who knows Harlan Crow recognizes, his extensive hospitality to a great many people is central to his life.
Nonetheless, various government “ethics” experts have denounced Thomas for exploiting a “loophole.”
ProPublica went to enormous lengths to learn the details of Thomas’ relationship with Crow, scouring flight records and interviewing yacht crews and resort staff that have worked for or near Crow’s holdings.
That’s a standard modus operandi for ProPublica. Its last big “scoop” was revealing very specific details of the income-tax returns for the 15 highest-income Americans, including Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg — details that came from a “leak” from inside the IRS that ProPublica failed to mention constituted a felony.
(The IRS leaker has still not been found.)
ProPublica also dinged Thomas for not reporting the sale of a property to a company linked to Crow, who says he bought it in order to preserve it for posterity.
The entire payment was for a whopping $133,363, of which Thomas had a one-third interest. Meanwhile, Joe Biden gets a pass for dubious real-estate deals involving many multiples of that sum.
There is a clear pattern to ProPublica’s “independent” journalism.
As is well-known today, neither ProPublica nor any other media outlet (aside from the New York Post) has shown any interest in the swirling evidence of corruption by the Biden family, which includes banking interests purchasing residential property from then-Sen. Joe Biden during the years that Delaware’s banking industry was heavily lobbying Biden to “reform” bankruptcy laws in a manner more favorable to banking interests (which finally passed in 2007).
And let’s not get started on the media’s incuriosity about circumstantial evidence of widespread insider trading by members of Congress.
Nor does ProPublica find it germane to mention any other Supreme Court justices who’ve accepted private hospitality travel from wealthy individuals over the years.
Despite the insinuation of corruption, there’s a missing element in the breathless ProPublica smear job on Thomas and Crow: Even ProPublica admits “Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it.”
The best ProPublica can do is remark that “it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the justice’s views.”
This would be a laughable speculation if it wasn’t so stupid.
Anyone can read Thomas’ opinions, as well as his other public declarations in speeches and occasional articles, to see that he has a deep foundation for his jurisprudence.
The idea that a well-known philanthropist was changing Thomas’ jurisprudence through his hospitality is so ludicrous that only a leftist could believe it.
One of the left’s frequent attacks on Thomas for a long time was that he almost never asked a question during a Supreme Court hearing.
The racist subtext of this criticism was obvious, but branding him “Silent Thomas,” like the branding of “Silent Calvin Coolidge,” was an indirect way of saying he could be ignored, that his opinions and dissents needn’t be taken seriously.
Since the court changed its protocol for oral arguments during COVID and ended the rather rude free-for-all atmosphere that marked its hearings for decades, Thomas is suddenly speaking up much more often.
And as the senior-most justice by length of tenure on the court and flexing growing intellectual influence with the newer justices, he can no longer be ignored.
Hence the need for the left to try once again to destroy him by any means necessary.
Steven F. Hayward is a resident scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.
Of course the fascist in you fights for the one Party state..,..
I wonder if you are willing to admit that it is the Republican Party that has done all the gerrymandering in the past couple decades or so to negate the votes of majorities in many areas? How they have achieved supermajorities in many places. Take Indiana. Please…
Not in agreement but an interesting perspective nonetheless.
At least you read and considered it. That's far more intelligent than Lo T who plays like a bot throwing out word salads to defend his fascist fight for a one Party state.
the Republican Party that has done all the gerrymandering in the past couple decades
"all" isn't quite right. Both sides engage in the practice. It is the left that now claims to oppose it because the republicans now have taken the advantage. Despite their opposition to it, dems still do it every chance they get and go to the courts to stop repubs from it.
How they have achieved supermajorities in many places.
This is largely untrue. Gerrymandering districts only affects congressional house numbers. (weak minded fools shit themselves that I vote numbers in a gov't based on numbers). The senate, governot and president are unaffected by the practice. That makes "supermajority" a non-factor. Two important factors are in play- Dem states are ahead of the gams locking down state gov't using this. Led by California, several states have crafted both districts and laws locking in a single party control. The other, and most troubling (to me) is polarization migration. Leftist states are losing population in many states. They are fleeing(?) to red states. While this doesn't affect senate numbers (no gerrymandering), it does move house numbers from blue to red. Red state population grows and adds numbers, blue states lose population and house numbers. But the real problem is increased polarization. Red states become redder, blue states become bluer.
Interesting. Indiana is doing much better than several neighboring states. Illinois, for example, blames its woes on Indiana. They gerrymandered a dem party favorite, Kinsinger, out of a congressional seat because (and I'm not making this up) numbers.
Behind the left’s utterly bogus bid to take down Clarence Thomas
The manufactured “scandal” of Justice Clarence Thomas’ relationship with philanthropist Harlan Crow unites two of the left’s chief bigotries today — a hatred of black conservatives and a hatred of billionaires.
Given the left’s relentless attacks on Thomas ever since bogus sexual-harassment charges failed to derail his confirmation back in 1991, the only surprise is that it took so long to come up with this angle.
Last week, ProPublica, a self-described “independent, non-profit investigative journalism” organization funded by left-wing philanthropists aligned with the Democratic Party, broke the story that Thomas has accepted numerous flights and trips on Crow’s private jet and luxury yacht, as well as annual vacations with Crow at Crow’s summer retreat in New York’s Adirondacks.
Most of these trips were not disclosed as the Supreme Court’s disclosure rules exempt personal hospitality — and, as anyone who knows Harlan Crow recognizes, his extensive hospitality to a great many people is central to his life.
Nonetheless, various government “ethics” experts have denounced Thomas for exploiting a “loophole.”
ProPublica went to enormous lengths to learn the details of Thomas’ relationship with Crow, scouring flight records and interviewing yacht crews and resort staff that have worked for or near Crow’s holdings.
That’s a standard modus operandi for ProPublica. Its last big “scoop” was revealing very specific details of the income-tax returns for the 15 highest-income Americans, including Bill Gates and Michael Bloomberg — details that came from a “leak” from inside the IRS that ProPublica failed to mention constituted a felony.
(The IRS leaker has still not been found.)
ProPublica also dinged Thomas for not reporting the sale of a property to a company linked to Crow, who says he bought it in order to preserve it for posterity.
The entire payment was for a whopping $133,363, of which Thomas had a one-third interest. Meanwhile, Joe Biden gets a pass for dubious real-estate deals involving many multiples of that sum.
There is a clear pattern to ProPublica’s “independent” journalism.
As is well-known today, neither ProPublica nor any other media outlet (aside from the New York Post) has shown any interest in the swirling evidence of corruption by the Biden family, which includes banking interests purchasing residential property from then-Sen. Joe Biden during the years that Delaware’s banking industry was heavily lobbying Biden to “reform” bankruptcy laws in a manner more favorable to banking interests (which finally passed in 2007).
And let’s not get started on the media’s incuriosity about circumstantial evidence of widespread insider trading by members of Congress.
Nor does ProPublica find it germane to mention any other Supreme Court justices who’ve accepted private hospitality travel from wealthy individuals over the years.
Despite the insinuation of corruption, there’s a missing element in the breathless ProPublica smear job on Thomas and Crow: Even ProPublica admits “Crow and his firm have not had a case before the Supreme Court since Thomas joined it.”
The best ProPublica can do is remark that “it is unclear if Crow has had any influence on the justice’s views.”
This would be a laughable speculation if it wasn’t so stupid.
Anyone can read Thomas’ opinions, as well as his other public declarations in speeches and occasional articles, to see that he has a deep foundation for his jurisprudence.
The idea that a well-known philanthropist was changing Thomas’ jurisprudence through his hospitality is so ludicrous that only a leftist could believe it.
One of the left’s frequent attacks on Thomas for a long time was that he almost never asked a question during a Supreme Court hearing.
The racist subtext of this criticism was obvious, but branding him “Silent Thomas,” like the branding of “Silent Calvin Coolidge,” was an indirect way of saying he could be ignored, that his opinions and dissents needn’t be taken seriously.
Since the court changed its protocol for oral arguments during COVID and ended the rather rude free-for-all atmosphere that marked its hearings for decades, Thomas is suddenly speaking up much more often.
And as the senior-most justice by length of tenure on the court and flexing growing intellectual influence with the newer justices, he can no longer be ignored.
Hence the need for the left to try once again to destroy him by any means necessary.
Steven F. Hayward is a resident scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley.
The guy fucked up. So instead of expecting accountability for actions that would suggest he’s in the pocket of a person who has heavy financial influence on politics, instead it’s an agenda from the opposing political party and this is all just a big nothing burger.
Regardless of the outcome, political party, or people involved, this kind of shit will always be an issue as long as corporate money is in politics.
It’s incredible that EVERY issue that involves your team is no big deal/blown out of proportion/somebody else’s fault, but when it’s the democrats who fuck up they need to be accountable for fucking things up. Your schoolyard mentality makes more sense day by day, considering everything you don’t agree with or makes you uncomfortable is never caused by the party you support.
Last Edit: Apr 16, 2023 14:14:53 GMT -8 by 321-123