BillStime Posted July 9, 2023 Author Share Posted July 9, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 10, 2023 Author Share Posted July 10, 2023 👆🤡 - Bonnie always quick to clean up the mess of his cult. Party of law and order* 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2023 Author Share Posted July 11, 2023 Yup 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 11, 2023 Share Posted July 11, 2023 Maybe now conservatives will support ethics reform for SCOTUS... Supreme Court Justice Sotomayor’s staff prodded colleges and libraries to buy her books Sotomayor’s staff has often prodded public institutions that have hosted the justice to buy her memoir or children’s books, works that have earned her at least $3.7 million since she joined the court in 2009. Details of those events, largely out of public view, were obtained by The Associated Press through more than 100 open records requests to public institutions. The resulting tens of thousands of pages of documents offer a rare look at Sotomayor and her fellow justices beyond their official duties. In her case, the documents reveal repeated examples of taxpayer-funded court staff performing tasks for the justice’s book ventures, which workers in other branches of government are barred from doing. But when it comes to promoting her literary career, Sotomayor is free to do what other government officials cannot because the Supreme Court does not have a formal code of conduct, leaving the nine justices to largely write and enforce their own rules. “This is one of the most basic tenets of ethics laws that protects taxpayer dollars from misuse,” said Kedric Payne, a former deputy chief counsel at the Office of Congressional Ethics and current general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan government watchdog group in Washington. “The problem at the Supreme Court is there’s no one there to say whether this is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 11, 2023 Author Share Posted July 11, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 12, 2023 Author Share Posted July 12, 2023 Impeach 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 16, 2023 Author Share Posted July 16, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 More Democrat Party racism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 So that would make Ellison a field slave? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 17, 2023 Share Posted July 17, 2023 The Supreme Court ‘Ethics’ Scandal Is The New Russia-Collusion Hoax BY: DAVID HARSANYI Senate Democrats are advancing a doomed Supreme Court “ethics” bill that would withhold $10 million in funding from Chief Justice John Roberts until the Supreme Court has “put into effect a code” for all justices. The Senate doesn’t have the power to dictate how the Supreme Court conducts its business — any more than SCOTUS has the power to prescribe rules for the Senate. They know it. Then again, the effort to intimidate and delegitimize the court is meant to corrode constitutional governance, so perhaps the bill makes a certain amount of perverse sense. Of course, turning to the likes of Sheldon Whitehouse and Dick Durbin for ethical guidance is much like seeking truth from Adam Schiff. And much like the Russia-collusion hoax, the effort to destroy the Supreme Court is a highly coordinated partisan scheme. First, anti-court left-wing activist groups cook up some ethics “scandals.” These accusations are then laundered by complicit or credulous leftist media outlets for public consumption. Then, the bogus scoops are held up by partisans as proof of alleged wrongdoing. Everyone, other than perhaps the most gullible partisan hysteric, understands what’s happening. Each week another ethics “scandal” emerges, one dumber than the next. The stories are divvied out among numerous outlets to saturate the news and create a perception of widespread wrongdoing. Some, such as ProPublica, are paid by pack-the-court groups. Others, such as Politico, Slate, and The New York Times, do it for free. A recent Guardian hit piece on Clarence Thomas, for example, offers a good example of how all this works. The justice, the paper excitedly reports, received “seven payments” through Venmo accounts in November and December 2019 from lawyers who had once clerked for the justice. Though the amounts were not disclosed — one strongly suspects the minuscule sums would make the story even more preposterous — The Guardian explains that “the purpose of each payment is listed as either ‘Christmas party’, ‘Thomas Christmas Party’, ‘CT Christmas Party’ or ‘CT Xmas party.’” Now, I’m going to take a wild stab at cracking this whodunnit and speculate that a bunch of people chipped in for a Christmas party. The implication that Thomas threw cases or was paid off or felt an obligation to side with former clerks because they bought him a taco and a beer at a reunion is incomprehensibly stupid. No one believes it. https://thefederalist.com/2023/07/17/the-supreme-court-ethics-scandal-is-the-new-russia-collusion-hoax/ . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 19, 2023 Author Share Posted July 19, 2023 It's interesting - the GQP likes to bich about things - today we have @JDHillFan and @Over 29 years of fanhoodcrying about things not being fair when it comes to taxes and the IRS... but when it actually comes time to hold people accountable - they are trained not to actually want to do anything about it... Another example: Millionaires for billionaires. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted July 20, 2023 Author Share Posted July 20, 2023 When you have to spend millions on a media campaign to whitewash the image of a sitting member of the Supreme Court. Influential activist Leonard Leo helped fund media campaign lionizing Clarence Thomas BTW - same guy - where is the GQP WEOPONIZATION COMMITTEE WHEN YOU ACTUALLY NEED THEM? F'n hacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 Uh-huh. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 20, 2023 Share Posted July 20, 2023 5 hours ago, B-Man said: Uh-huh. Proving what I/many of us said, i.e. that the leaker was a Dem clerk. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChiGoose Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 Conservatives: Stupid liberals think everything is racist. Liberals: Maybe Supreme Court justices shouldn’t take free gifts from billionaires. Conservatives: THAT’S RACIST!!!! 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 11 hours ago, ChiGoose said: Conservatives: Stupid liberals think everything is racist. Liberals: Maybe Supreme Court justices shouldn’t take free gifts from billionaires. Conservatives: THAT’S RACIST!!!! Good read on the situation. As usual. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 On 7/17/2023 at 2:10 PM, B-Man said: More Democrat Party racism. Ellison can get away with saying it. And he should. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 3 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Ellison can get away with saying it. And he should. And you feel you are accomplished enough in life to get away with calling him an Uncle Tom. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 (edited) 2 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: And you feel you are accomplished enough in life to get away with calling him an Uncle Tom. Are credentials required to give an opinion? Good lord, shut this site down. But I agree, Ellison has more gravitas on this issue. I hope he keeps talking about Clarence. Edited July 21, 2023 by redtail hawk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted July 21, 2023 Share Posted July 21, 2023 (edited) 15 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: Are credentials required to give an opinion? Good lord, shut this site down. But I agree, Ellison has more gravitas on this issue. I hope he keeps talking about Clarence. In many African American communities "Uncle Tom" is a slur used to disparage a black person who is humiliatingly subservient or deferential to white people. This is what now passes for “giving an opinion”? A truly pathetic attempt to justify your demeaning words. Racial slur = giving an opinion the latest redhawk gem Edited July 21, 2023 by JDHillFan 1 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 WaPo bent out of shape conservatives defending Justice Thomas Friday’s Washington Post included no story on the House Weaponization Subcommittee’s hearing with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Emma-Jo Morris on Big Tech censorship. But the front page had an obligatory front-page story on a grand jury investigating Donald Trump and this amazing scandal piece: “Activist Leo aided drive to lionize Thomas: Federalist Society figure uses his sway before and after naming of justices.” It’s a scandal that Leonard Leo would organize positive publicity about a conservative Supreme Court justice. This is somehow…. unethical? Right under the “See more on A4” tag was a plug for the Senate Democrats passing a Supreme Court ethics bill. In 2016, positive PR was organized around Justice Thomas serving 25 years on the court. But the year before, the Post was on the organized PR bandwagon celebrating the “Notorious RBG.” They were a part of that, so apparently it wasn’t scandalous. Maybe liberals don’t have to raise money for that when media outlets will do it for free. CNN made a gushy RBG documentary. Inside the paper was a picture of Leonard Leo at -- uh-oh -- the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. Reporters Shawn Boburg, Emma Brown, and Ann Marimow worked hard to imply something dastardly was going on with this Leo campaign for Clarence: {snip} When conservative PR is a scandal and liberal PR is just PR, you get the distinct sense that the "Democracy Dies in Darkness" folks really don't like people organizing an opposing pile of publicity. They called this "a more aggressive approach that sought to sway public opinion through mass media." The Washington Post never attempts this? https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2023/07/22/washpost-scandalized-conservative-drive-lionize-justice-thomas-sway 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted July 23, 2023 Share Posted July 23, 2023 5 minutes ago, B-Man said: WaPo bent out of shape conservatives defending Justice Thomas Friday’s Washington Post included no story on the House Weaponization Subcommittee’s hearing with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Emma-Jo Morris on Big Tech censorship. But the front page had an obligatory front-page story on a grand jury investigating Donald Trump and this amazing scandal piece: “Activist Leo aided drive to lionize Thomas: Federalist Society figure uses his sway before and after naming of justices.” It’s a scandal that Leonard Leo would organize positive publicity about a conservative Supreme Court justice. This is somehow…. unethical? Right under the “See more on A4” tag was a plug for the Senate Democrats passing a Supreme Court ethics bill. In 2016, positive PR was organized around Justice Thomas serving 25 years on the court. But the year before, the Post was on the organized PR bandwagon celebrating the “Notorious RBG.” They were a part of that, so apparently it wasn’t scandalous. Maybe liberals don’t have to raise money for that when media outlets will do it for free. CNN made a gushy RBG documentary. Inside the paper was a picture of Leonard Leo at -- uh-oh -- the National Catholic Prayer Breakfast. Reporters Shawn Boburg, Emma Brown, and Ann Marimow worked hard to imply something dastardly was going on with this Leo campaign for Clarence: {snip} When conservative PR is a scandal and liberal PR is just PR, you get the distinct sense that the "Democracy Dies in Darkness" folks really don't like people organizing an opposing pile of publicity. They called this "a more aggressive approach that sought to sway public opinion through mass media." The Washington Post never attempts this? https://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tim-graham/2023/07/22/washpost-scandalized-conservative-drive-lionize-justice-thomas-sway sure. He and his billionaire friends are victims too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 Whitehouse's bill has no chance of ever passing and neither does court packing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SectionC3 Posted July 30, 2023 Share Posted July 30, 2023 33 minutes ago, B-Man said: Truth. Justice Alito has Stern Words for Sheldon Whitehouse and His Attempt to Grab Control of the Supreme Court Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito removed all doubt about how the US Supreme Court would respond to efforts by progressive politicians to dictate its internal workings. Alito said, “I know this is a controversial view, but I’m willing to say it, no provision in the Constitution gives them the authority to regulate the Supreme Court—period.” Justice Alito says he voluntarily follows disclosure statutes that apply to lower-court judges and executive-branch officials; so do the other justices. But he notes that “Congress did not create the Supreme Court”—the Constitution did. https://redstate.com/streiff/2023/07/29/justice-alito-has-stern-words-for-sheldon-whitehouse-and-his-attempt-to-grab-control-of-the-supreme-court-n784230 The court could also, like, regulate itself by applying more stringent ethics standards. But it won’t. Which is a shame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted August 2, 2023 Author Share Posted August 2, 2023 👀 Seems like a big deal. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted August 6, 2023 Share Posted August 6, 2023 Scumbag grifter. Sold his soul and part of America's https://dnyuz.com/2023/08/05/clarence-thomass-267230-r-v-and-the-friend-who-financed-it/ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted August 6, 2023 Author Share Posted August 6, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted August 7, 2023 Share Posted August 7, 2023 The truth behind the Left's fake accusations. Democrats vs. the Supreme Court They want to influence which Justices can hear certain cases, which would destroy judicial independence. https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-vs-the-supreme-court-alito-durbin-senate-ethics-64752049 . 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted August 7, 2023 Author Share Posted August 7, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted August 10, 2023 Author Share Posted August 10, 2023 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Callahan Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 "While some of the hospitality, such as stays in personal homes, may not have required disclosure, Thomas appears to have violated the law by failing to disclose flights, yacht cruises and expensive sports tickets, according to ethics experts." What are the names of said experts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 scummy grifter uncle Tom https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-billionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFanNC Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 27 minutes ago, Chris farley said: "While some of the hospitality, such as stays in personal homes, may not have required disclosure, Thomas appears to have violated the law by failing to disclose flights, yacht cruises and expensive sports tickets, according to ethics experts." What are the names of said experts? Everyone is an "expert" on everything in a post covid world! @BillStime expert here. Quack MD @redtail hawk expert on vaccines and immunology. @ChiGoose expert on, well everything. The King always is. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillStime Posted August 10, 2023 Author Share Posted August 10, 2023 47 minutes ago, Chris farley said: "While some of the hospitality, such as stays in personal homes, may not have required disclosure, Thomas appears to have violated the law by failing to disclose flights, yacht cruises and expensive sports tickets, according to ethics experts." What are the names of said experts? 16 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Everyone is an "expert" on everything in a post covid world! @BillStime expert here. Quack MD @redtail hawk expert on vaccines and immunology. @ChiGoose expert on, well everything. The King always is. 👆🤣🤡🤣🤡🤣🤡🤣🤡👆 These clowns can’t help themselves. These hacks must defend anything and everything GQP no matter how hypocritical it makes them and indefensible it might be. lol 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 29 minutes ago, BillsFanNC said: Everyone is an "expert" on everything in a post covid world! @BillStime expert here. Quack MD @redtail hawk expert on vaccines and immunology. @ChiGoose expert on, well everything. The King always is. at least we don't claim qualifications, training and degrees we don't and will never possess. there's that. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDHillFan Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 40 minutes ago, redtail hawk said: scummy grifter uncle Tom https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-billionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court It’s been awhile since you let a racist slur fly. Must have felt good for you. Sick fk. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Ferguson forever Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, JDHillFan said: It’s been awhile since you let a racist slur fly. Must have felt good for you. Sick fk. doing just fine😀 Thomas has sold his soul. Not shocking that you can't see that. Interesting that the poll on this thread, with 30% of responders thinking Thomas is not conflicted, matches the percentage of ultra MAGA's in the electorate. Microcosm of American politics here. It's like a mini sociology experiment. Edited August 10, 2023 by redtail hawk 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kemp Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 Thomas is not conflicted. He's in the tank. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Posted August 10, 2023 Share Posted August 10, 2023 On 8/6/2023 at 10:43 AM, redtail hawk said: Scumbag grifter. Sold his soul and part of America's https://dnyuz.com/2023/08/05/clarence-thomass-267230-r-v-and-the-friend-who-financed-it/ There is absolutely no evidence of what you’re saying. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts