Justice Thomas -

Of course, he must be a predator, look at him. Thanks for the input!

Why would you assume that?

Because I am discussing right/wrong. I am sure you can opine if you think disclosure rules are good/bad fair/not fair. Just because something is not a rule/law doesn't mean that it is still something that shouldn't be done. I don't think Justices should be accepting money from billionaires and that seems to be the sentiment of many people. I don't know your stance on that, maybe you'll opine.

If the rules were in place, he could easily comply. Stop being obtuse.

Yes, he could. Ron's saying that rules are more stringent for other federal bodies; it's odd that the supreme court justices are allowed to not disclose money/gifts given to them outside the government.



I explained the how so: People do not want the highest courts in the land being courted (given money) by billionaires. I'm sure you're ok with it based on your defense of this. That's ok to hold that opinion, and maybe you can explain why you hold that opinion. I am of the opinion that it's not ok because it seems like improper influence on a justice that could influence decisions. You can argue the merits of that position and why it's not a good position, or you can go the route of giving examples of other justices being given money by billionaires and pretending I am ok with it. I'll just say now I am not ok with it meaing that conversation would be pointless.

I don't know if Thomas broke any laws and I don't care. 

Thomas has ruined his reputation for impartiality.  For an SJC, impartiality is sacred if people are to have faith in the judicial system. 
If people come to believe the courts are "rigged" they will ignore the law. 

BTW
Who are you accusing of being a racist? 
Who are you accusing of being "pieces of shit"?
What makes you so angry?

It's odd that Cruz went from detailing that justice's "took trips" and the number of them, followed by one trip (not a vacation/yacht or financing their spouses salaries) financed by a billionaire. Indicating that all other trips were not vacations or financed by the wealthy?

Maybe he just likes to say "Look at my African American over there."

This coming from the guy who called Thomas "the whitest guy in the room" because he disagrees with his politics and can't cope.

I didn't say he didn't follow all disclosure requirements; and you even took out the part that I am letting you know I am not stating that.

I was asking you to opine if it should be ok for any supreme court justice to be receiving money from billonaires - this would include $600,000+ vacations on yachts, financing his wife's salary and pet projects (catered to partisan projects), purchasing property and paying for their families schooling. To me, that shows the appearance of being bought/paid for. They were not friends until after be became a supreme court justice, so it wasn't as if it was a long time friend. I was asking you to opine on whether you think that is ok, or if you even have a line on where it is crossed. The line wouldn't be at the exact moment that he happens to rule on something that benefited a billionaire. It would be impossible to know the motive if it any decision that benefited said billionaire's fortune would have been decided the same way regardless of the money being given to Justice Thomas.

It really wouldn't be. Thomas is fairly consistent in his rulings. How do his rulings differ from before and after he met Crow? Has anyone trying to sensationalize this for political purposes made any case for impartiality? Let me know.

But it does matter. Your real life example isn't as relevant as you think.