BillStime Posted March 24, 2022 Share Posted March 24, 2022 (edited) Simple question - Is Clarence Thomas conflicted? Edited July 9, 2023 by BillStime Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beach Posted March 24, 2022 Share Posted March 24, 2022 i dont know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sherpa Posted March 24, 2022 Share Posted March 24, 2022 18 minutes ago, Beach said: i dont know I get it. You're hopelessly conflicted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 24, 2022 Author Share Posted March 24, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 I’d tell him to go with the Veal Marsala. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
716er Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 He's in some serious trouble but not as much as his wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 2 hours ago, BillStime said: Simple question - Is Clarence Thomas conflicted? Why do you hate successful, intelligent black men? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 25, 2022 Author Share Posted March 25, 2022 10 minutes ago, Westside said: Why do you hate successful, intelligent black men? Cute. Is Clarence Thomas conflicted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 He's not conflicted in general, but ... his wife's political activism has crossed a line we just haven't seen crossed before, at least with a Supreme Court justice. By the way, I thought the same thing about that liberal lion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the late Stephen Reinhardt. His wife was the head of the ACLU of Los Angeles, but he didn't recuse himself from cases in which she had been involved. It's just bad form and puts an ugly cloud over the integrity of a court. It's not like we're depriving Mrs. Thomas of the right to make a living - she did (and could) continue to do just fine lobbying for discrete industries like she used to. Exhibit 1,017 of Why People Hate Washington: the politicians and Justices exempt themselves from the rules that apply to everyone else, particularly everyone else with a policy-making/deciding job. 1 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 3 minutes ago, The Frankish Reich said: He's not conflicted in general, but ... his wife's political activism has crossed a line we just haven't seen crossed before, at least with a Supreme Court justice. By the way, I thought the same thing about that liberal lion of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the late Stephen Reinhardt. His wife was the head of the ACLU of Los Angeles, but he didn't recuse himself from cases in which she had been involved. It's just bad form and puts an ugly cloud over the integrity of a court. It's not like we're depriving Mrs. Thomas of the right to make a living - she did (and could) continue to do just fine lobbying for discrete industries like she used to. Exhibit 1,017 of Why People Hate Washington: the politicians and Justices exempt themselves from the rules that apply to everyone else, particularly everyone else with a policy-making/deciding job. Kind of like having a father in politics who sets you up on the board of an energy company while making hundreds of thousands of dollars with absolutely no experience! Is that what you’re talking about? 1 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 (edited) 11 minutes ago, Westside said: Kind of like having a father in politics who sets you up on the board of an energy company while making hundreds of thousands of dollars with absolutely no experience! Is that what you’re talking about? No. I think this is what they call "whataboutism." There's corruption and corrupt family members of politicians everywhere. I am not about to defend all of that. We are talking about a Supreme Court Justice here -- one of just 9 people who decide whether a whole host of policies enacted by various Administrations should be allowed or should be shot down. Extreme partisanship on the part of a spouse is just bad form. It's not just election disputes (which, by the way, he did get involved in when the Supreme Court shot down some state challenges to the 2020 election); it's also a whole host of policies she is stridently advocating for or against that will inevitably wind up before the Court. Clarence and Ginni ought to (and do) know better. If her activism is that important to her, and if he loves her and thinks her mission in life is more important than his, well, he's of retirement age ... EDIT: by the way, you may or may not have seen that nominee KBJ said she would recuse herself from the Supreme Court's consideration of the Harvard affirmative action lawsuit because she was on the Harvard Board of Overseers at the time their affirmative action policy at issue was in place. This is a fair and honorable decision, and given the incredible leeway Supreme Court Justices get to make their own ethics calls, not one that she had to commit to now (she would've been confirmed anyway) Edited March 25, 2022 by The Frankish Reich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 25, 2022 Author Share Posted March 25, 2022 3 minutes ago, Westside said: Kind of like having a father in politics who sets you up on the board of an energy company while making hundreds of thousands of dollars with absolutely no experience! Is that what you’re talking about? Or your father hiring his daughter and son in law in positions with absolutely no experience…. And that same daughter receiving numerous patents/trademarks from China while her Daddy is POTUS; and that same couple making over $640,000,000 while working at the WH and the son in law securing more than $3,000,000,000 in funding from international investors for his new investment firm. We won’t even remind you how much Trump spent golfing and traveling to his properties or forcing the government to spend money at his properties here and abroad… Yeah - Hunters laptop. Idiots 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 1 minute ago, The Frankish Reich said: No. I think this is what they call "whataboutism." There's corruption and corrupt family members of politicians everywhere. I am not about to defend all of that. We are talking about a Supreme Court Justice here -- one of just 9 people who decide whether a whole host of policies enacted by various Administrations should be allowed or should be shot down. Extreme partisanship on the part of a spouse is just bad form. It's not just election disputes (which, by the way, he did get involved in when the Supreme Court shot down some state challenges to the 2020 election); it's also a whole host of policies she is stridently advocating for or against that will inevitably wind up before the Court. Clarence and Ginni ought to (and do) know better. If her activism is that important to her, and if he loves her and thinks her mission in life is more important than his, well, he's of retirement age ... Well, considering all the BS the left spewed about the president being a Russian stooge, I find it hard to believe anything they come up with. Be honest, the only reason you want him to retire is you don’t agree with his politics. Let’s get another partisan judge with less than stellar qualifications to spread their partisan BS policies. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 2 minutes ago, Westside said: Be honest, the only reason you want him to retire is you don’t agree with his politics I don't agree with his wife's politics. And I think the spouse of a Supreme Court Justice should understand that she's not in the position of an ordinary person - there's a commitment there, a patriotic commitment to the American people that she really doesn't seem to understand. A Supreme Court Justice him or herself shouldn't be a politician. And he could've easily retired when the Repubs had the presidency and the Senate, so that argument won't work. As a Supreme Court Justice, I actually generally respect his opinions. He definitely has a judicial philosophy that is, unfortunately, a little more result-oriented than his fellow traveler Scalia (Scalia had no problem with going against the "conservatives" when he thought they had gone beyond what the constitution authorizes; Thomas is a little less confident), but still pretty grounded in solid constitutional philosophy, whether you agree or disagree with that philosophy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 My god people! Doesn’t anyone see how utterly racist it is to single out Justice Thomas in this matter? What is wrong with you? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 6 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: My god people! Doesn’t anyone see how utterly racist it is to single out Justice Thomas in this matter? What is wrong with you? I assume that's sarcasm ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Over 29 years of fanhood Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 1 hour ago, The Frankish Reich said: No. I think this is what they call "whataboutism." There's corruption and corrupt family members of politicians everywhere. I am not about to defend all of that. We are talking about a Supreme Court Justice here -- one of just 9 people who decide whether a whole host of policies enacted by various Administrations should be allowed or should be shot down. Extreme partisanship on the part of a spouse is just bad form. It's not just election disputes (which, by the way, he did get involved in when the Supreme Court shot down some state challenges to the 2020 election); it's also a whole host of policies she is stridently advocating for or against that will inevitably wind up before the Court. Clarence and Ginni ought to (and do) know better. If her activism is that important to her, and if he loves her and thinks her mission in life is more important than his, well, he's of retirement age ... EDIT: by the way, you may or may not have seen that nominee KBJ said she would recuse herself from the Supreme Court's consideration of the Harvard affirmative action lawsuit because she was on the Harvard Board of Overseers at the time their affirmative action policy at issue was in place. This is a fair and honorable decision, and given the incredible leeway Supreme Court Justices get to make their own ethics calls, not one that she had to commit to now (she would've been confirmed anyway) Decent write up. Political activism or corruption in the vicinity of powerful people is either desirable or undesirable. Both sides have done it and that is why separation and decentralization of governmental power is important. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 No wonder he was sick this week. Emotional shock making him physically sick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 The work of the January 6 select committee has already come before the Supreme Court. In January, the court did not stand in the way of the release of thousands of documents from the Trump White House despite the former President suing to keep them secret under executive privilege. The vote on the matter was 8-1, with only Thomas dissenting 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
All_Pro_Bills Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 42 minutes ago, Tiberius said: The work of the January 6 select committee has already come before the Supreme Court. In January, the court did not stand in the way of the release of thousands of documents from the Trump White House despite the former President suing to keep them secret under executive privilege. The vote on the matter was 8-1, with only Thomas dissenting Wonderful, sounds like the makings of a new conspiracy theory. Justice Thomas is protecting Trump. When one crackpot hoax hits a dead end just generate another. So what's your question? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 10 minutes ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Wonderful, sounds like the makings of a new conspiracy theory. Justice Thomas is protecting Trump. When one crackpot hoax hits a dead end just generate another. So what's your question? What's the conspiracy theory? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 Justice Thomas is an amazing man and a giant in American history. He should be viewed as an inspiration to millions but sadly knew the truth very early on—-he wasn’t the right type of man for some. He seems to be as unconflicted as anyone who has ever served in the position. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 25, 2022 Author Share Posted March 25, 2022 Totally f’n normal 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 Remember when the PPP conspiracy ghouls trotted out all the photos and crap about RBG being dead for weeks on end? Good times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 5 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Justice Thomas is an amazing man and a giant in American history. He should be viewed as an inspiration to millions but sadly knew the truth very early on—-he wasn’t the right type of man for some. He seems to be as unconflicted as anyone who has ever served in the position. Why is he so inspiring to you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 25, 2022 Author Share Posted March 25, 2022 “Do not concede. It takes time for the army who is gathering for his back.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 24 minutes ago, DRsGhost said: Was Hunter Biden cheering an attempted coup? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Frankish Reich Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 2 hours ago, All_Pro_Bills said: Wonderful, sounds like the makings of a new conspiracy theory. Justice Thomas is protecting Trump. When one crackpot hoax hits a dead end just generate another. So what's your question? Nothing crack pot about these FACTS. It’s worse than I realized yesterday. - the Supreme Court had to decide whether to grant Trump’s request to quash a congressional subpoena for text messages relating to January 6. - they voted 8-1 against Trump. - THOMAS was the sole dissenting vote. - among the texts in question are those to/from MRS THOMAS and Chief Of Staff Mark Meadows. - if Clarence Thomas knew or had reason to believe that the Court’s decision here would directly involve texts to/from his wife, every judge in America would agree that he needed to recuse himself. I suppose it’s conceivable that he really didn’t know or have reason to believe this, but that really strains credibility. His single dissenting vote wouldn’t matter anyway. So what on earth was he thinking when he decided to participate in this case? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 25, 2022 Author Share Posted March 25, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 1 hour ago, Tiberius said: Why is he so inspiring to you? Well, big picture: A man from Georgia, born before the civil rights era, the son of humble people finds his way through school and ends up attending one of the most prestigious law schools in the country. He graduated a mere ten years after Yale began allowing Black students to grace the hallowed and previously exclusively caucasian halls. He's spoken of the difficulties he had getting a job after graduating law school, his feeling that he was rejected in part because he was viewed as an affirmative action candidate. He's reconciled whatever issues he had with the school itself, but he clearly had mixed feelings about his treatment from his alma mater. When nominated to be the second Black American to sit on the Supreme Court, he was attacked rather viciously by "leaders" in the country, many of whom were active and willing participants in developing the laws and regulations that we look back now on as specifically designed to isolate and target specific types of people that looked like, well, him. Some were part of the entitled class, a bunch of glad-handing towel snappers chasing congressional tail and in at least one case, leaving a comely staffer to drown at the bottom of a pond and that had to be particularly galling to him. He's in an interracial marriage. I have a friends and family members who have followed that path and it's not an easy road to travel now, and harder still 20+ years ago. He's an incredibly accomplished human being, been graceful in the face of adversity, carved his own path through life and has been the object of scorn and ridicule from far, far lesser men. I have to get his book--been meaning to do that, Tibsy, thanks. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 1 hour ago, BillStime said: One more time…the democratic candidate paid for a phony hit piece story and then sitting back in silence, watched while it was used to ACTUALLY try and overturn the results of an election. Let that sink in for a second. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 9 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: Well, big picture: A man from Georgia, born before the civil rights era, the son of humble people finds his way through school and ends up attending one of the most prestigious law schools in the country. He graduated a mere ten years after Yale began allowing Black students to grace the hallowed and previously exclusively caucasian halls. He's spoken of the difficulties he had getting a job after graduating law school, his feeling that he was rejected in part because he was viewed as an affirmative action candidate. He's reconciled whatever issues he had with the school itself, but he clearly had mixed feelings about his treatment from his alma mater. When nominated to be the second Black American to sit on the Supreme Court, he was attacked rather viciously by "leaders" in the country, many of whom were active and willing participants in developing the laws and regulations that we look back now on as specifically designed to isolate and target specific types of people that looked like, well, him. Some were part of the entitled class, a bunch of glad-handing towel snappers chasing congressional tail and in at least one case, leaving a comely staffer to drown at the bottom of a pond and that had to be particularly galling to him. He's in an interracial marriage. I have a friends and family members who have followed that path and it's not an easy road to travel now, and harder still 20+ years ago. He's an incredibly accomplished human being, been graceful in the face of adversity, carved his own path through life and has been the object of scorn and ridicule from far, far lesser men. I have to get his book--been meaning to do that, Tibsy, thanks. Does it bother you he benefitted from Affirmative Action? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted March 25, 2022 Author Share Posted March 25, 2022 11 minutes ago, SoCal Deek said: One more time…the democratic candidate paid for a phony hit piece story and then sitting back in silence, watched while it was used to ACTUALLY try and overturn the results of an election. Let that sink in for a second. Wait, are you talking about Pizza gate? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 17 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Does it bother you he benefitted from Affirmative Action? What part of what I wrote above leads you to ask me, personally, that question? Seems like a really odd question in context. Do you think, given his life's work, that he is unworthy of inspiring people? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 29 minutes ago, leh-nerd skin-erd said: What part of what I wrote above leads you to ask me, personally, that question? Seems like a really odd question in context. Do you think, given his life's work, that he is unworthy of inspiring people? Nothing, just thought that AA was something you are not for. But it got him where he is. So you support AA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Deek Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 41 minutes ago, BillStime said: Wait, are you talking about Pizza gate? I’m not at all sure what that means. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leh-nerd skin-erd Posted March 25, 2022 Share Posted March 25, 2022 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: Nothing, just thought that AA was something you are not for. But it got him where he is. So you support AA? Again, I'm not at all certain why anything I said would lead you to that conclusion. I'm happy to answer your question (again), but common courtesy dictates that you answer mine: Do you feel that Justice Thomas is unworthy of being called inspirational? That seems to be a sticking point for you, and I don't understand why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts