Clarence Thomas IS conflicted

[BillStime]

29 minutes ago, Westside said:

Try harder

 

That would be you.

 

 

17 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said:

The classic @ChiGoose playbook.

 

Everything single thing even hinting at dem malfeasance?

 

That's made up.

 

 

And yes @ChiGoose youre still on ignore. Unfortunately the ignore function doesn't work with quoted posts. Not that you'd know since you can't even figure out how to disable those harassing notifications that you constantly whine about.

 

So people help poor 'ol chigoose out and stop quoting him please. 

 

Quick, now go post another LAMP in the PPP harassment thread.

 

receipts.... not talking points please.

 

thanks

 

[BillStime]

4 minutes ago, B-Man said:

The left's desire to undermine our system and remove a check is not surprising.

 

Media's complicity in the effort is why they have a worse trust rating than a used car salesman.

 

But worst of all are the participants who otherwise lecture people about norms actively supporting it.

 

So profound, Bonnie AG

 

 

And AG - undermine our system and remove a check????

 

TRUMP DID THAT HIS ENTIRE F'n PRESIDENCY. 

 

jfc - you never think man - you never think.

 

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

4 hours ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

this is the Democratic position. PoC are a useful tool to gain power and divide, but those true latent supremacy instincts show themselves viscerally when PoC dares to have a different opinion. 

when they dare to take bribes from "the man" against the interests of the greater good and for their personal benefit... that's what Uncle Tom means

Edited May 5, 2023 by redtail hawk

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

17 minutes ago, redtail hawk said:

when they dare to take bribes from "the man" against the interests of the greater good and for their personal benefit... that's what Uncle Tom means

 

 

And You don’t care about bribes. You ball wash politicians on the take constantly provided they are ‘your’ people. 
 

maybe he is corrupt, it smells fishy (not Biden suitcases of millions of dollars from foreign adversary shell corporation fishy, but fishy), I’d just be interested to know what influence was bought from a conservative judge with a conservative voting record by a conservative businessman.  

[BillStime]

28 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

 

 

And You don’t care about bribes. You ball wash politicians on the take constantly provided they are ‘your’ people. 
 

maybe he is corrupt, it smells fishy (not Biden suitcases of millions of dollars from foreign adversary shell corporation fishy, but fishy), I’d just be interested to know what influence was bought from a conservative judge with a conservative voting record by a conservative businessman.  

“Independent” says what?

 

Any independent defending this is not an independent - you are a:
 

cc: @Doc

[BillStime]

What would Reagan say?

 

 

[B-Man]

 

 

The Left's plan is obvious.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SectionC3]

He’s made some poor choices.  His nonsense imperils the credibility of a fine institution.  It’s too bad he couldn’t resist temptation, although that seems to be a theme in his life.  

[BillsFanNC]

 

[Kemp]

On 5/4/2023 at 8:26 PM, Doc said:

 

Again, he, a conservative judge, was having his conservative votes bought by a conservative donor?  Is that what you're going with?

 

He was accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars and perhaps more, and hiding it. So, you're okay with buying supreme Court Justices?

If there's nothing wrong with what he did, why did he hide it?

If Soros had done the same for a Dem justice, the investigations would already be underway in Congress and you and yours would be throwing hissy fits.

[Kemp]

On 5/4/2023 at 8:58 PM, BillStime said:

 

Both look bad Kemp - no exceptions. 

 

The Supreme Court needs a code of ethics.

 

 

 

Someone shouldn't be able to be paid for writing a book?

Should this apply to all in Congress, as well? 

[Over 29 years of fanhood]

19 minutes ago, Kemp said:

 

He was accepting hundreds of thousands of dollars and perhaps more, and hiding it. So, you're okay with buying supreme Court Justices?

If there's nothing wrong with what he did, why did he hide it?

If Soros had done the same for a Dem justice, the investigations would already be underway in Congress and you and yours would be throwing hissy fits.

if soros did this for a dem justice you would have zero issue.   
 

Shocker it sounds like they are all doing it. Scoutus doesn’t pay that much, poor justices…. 

 

my question is what are you buying from a Justice when they are already in your ideological camp and don’t have cases before court? Is it insurance just in case, is it advance insight on rulings? 
 

 

 

[Pokebball]

24 minutes ago, Over 29 years of fanhood said:

if soros did this for a dem justice you would have zero issue.   
 

Shocker it sounds like they are all doing it. Scoutus doesn’t pay that much, poor justices…. 

 

my question is what are you buying from a Justice when they are already in your ideological camp and don’t have cases before court? Is it insurance just in case, is it advance insight on rulings? 
 

 

 

Transparency is occurring in these hearings, showing all of the justices have done similar things. None of them were "hiding" it. It appears the rules for disclosure didn't require reporting, or at best, not clear in certain situations. Perhaps the rules need to be strengthened? 

 

Can we please move on to the business our electeds should be concerned with?

 

[Joe Ferguson forever]

47 minutes ago, Pokebball said:

Transparency is occurring in these hearings, showing all of the justices have done similar things. None of them were "hiding" it. It appears the rules for disclosure didn't require reporting, or at best, not clear in certain situations. Perhaps the rules need to be strengthened? 

 

Can we please move on to the business our electeds should be concerned with?

 

No

[BillStime]

 

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, Pokebball said:

Transparency is occurring in these hearings, showing all of the justices have done similar things. None of them were "hiding" it. It appears the rules for disclosure didn't require reporting, or at best, not clear in certain situations. Perhaps the rules need to be strengthened? 

 

Can we please move on to the business our electeds should be concerned with?

 

The justices aren’t electeds.
 

Everyone at that institution who has been on the take is wrong.  Plain and simple.  Thomas seems to have been far and away the most egregious offender. 

Edited May 6, 2023 by SectionC3

[Pokebball]

4 hours ago, SectionC3 said:

The justices aren’t electeds.
 

Everyone at that institution who has been on the take is wrong.  Plain and simple.  Thomas seems to have been far and away the most egregious offender. 

Offender? It's been shown that RBG and Brier took more trips on a Dems dime. And I'll say again, I believe all, based on what has come to light, have reported consistently, to the existing standard. If we want the standard raised, we can change that prospectively.

Edited May 6, 2023 by Pokebball

[SectionC3]

3 hours ago, Pokebball said:

Offender? It's been shown that RBG and Brier took more trips on a Dems dime. And I'll say again, I believe all, based on what has come to light, have reported consistently, to the existing standard. If we want the standard raised, we can change that prospectively.

More trips or trips of greater value?  I'm sure Ted Cruz and you would have told me if RBG went on a half-million dollar excursion to Indonesia with George Soros or Ron Burkle.  

 

The bottom line is what Clarence Thomas has done is wrong.  Incredibly wrong.  It's bad for the institution.  The truth is that, were the Bush Republicans in charge and were this a Republican administration, the obvious solution would be for him to resign.  But, in a MAGA world and with a Democratic president, MAGA will defend this guy and deflect by trying to find something wrong with someone else. 

[Pokebball]

26 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

More trips or trips of greater value?  I'm sure Ted Cruz and you would have told me if RBG went on a half-million dollar excursion to Indonesia with George Soros or Ron Burkle.  

 

The bottom line is what Clarence Thomas has done is wrong.  Incredibly wrong.  It's bad for the institution.  The truth is that, were the Bush Republicans in charge and were this a Republican administration, the obvious solution would be for him to resign.  But, in a MAGA world and with a Democratic president, MAGA will defend this guy and deflect by trying to find something wrong with someone else. 

You're the antithesis of MAGA, and hardly objective here. When confronted with facts that other SCOTUS have done similar things, you say yeah, but how much or how many times? You don't want to hold Thomas to the same standard others have followed. You want to hold him to your standard.

 

And for context, I didn't vote for Trump either time.

 

[SectionC3]

14 hours ago, Pokebball said:

You're the antithesis of MAGA, and hardly objective here. When confronted with facts that other SCOTUS have done similar things, you say yeah, but how much or how many times? You don't want to hold Thomas to the same standard others have followed. You want to hold him to your standard.

 

And for context, I didn't vote for Trump either time.

 

Define similar.  And, what two people who aren't there now may or may not have done is not the issue.  The question is the justice who is presently engulfed by a host of self-inflicted ethics issues. 

Edited May 7, 2023 by SectionC3