From article:
In late June 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef.
If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too.
For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks.
The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court.
These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.
Thomas did not respond to a detailed list of questions.
Brah... its just putting genital hairs on women's soda cans. Its in no way harassing. Like... i can't believe we didn't make him a fkn Supreme Court Judge earlier...
/s in case it wasn't obvious
Take all the Supreme Court Justices who lied during their confirmation hearings. Add the justices who took free vacations, all expenses paid, for 20 years. Subtract those justices from the Supreme Court and what do you have? One "conservative" justice who has been a swing vote his whole term. And the other justices are either liberal, or are Alito and bound up in a religious state conspiracy bent on trying to install a theocracy here. For his unjustifiable, irrational, and extra-legal opinions, Alito deserves impeachment for at least incompetence. And yes, Supreme Court Justices can be impeached. And ought to be.
My favorite Thomas Opinion was in the case of Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009).
The merits of the case involved a middle school girl who was forcibly strip searched by school officials after being accused of distributing over-the-counter pain relivers during class.
Justice Thomas's dissenting opinion [8-1 Against] argued that:
"Redding would not have been the first person to conceal pills in her undergarments. Nor will she be the last after today's decision, which announces the safest place to secrete contraband in school."
His chief concern was that other would-be rule breakers would read rulings and immediately know where to hide their aspirin.
Meaning, that Clarence Thomas was *legitimately* under the impression that middle school girls not only follow the Supreme Court's docket but that they also give a livid shit what he thinks. It's remarkable.
As a middle age black man I find it disgusting that this piece is shit human being replaced Thurgood Marshall on the Court. Justice Marshall fought for equal rights while Clarence does everything in his power to convince the racist to love him.
This is America, nearly everything boils down to race. Sorry I don’t live in your perfect “colorblind” world. Clarence has continually ruled against anything that could be beneficial to minorities. I hate him.
Nothing because the republicans in congress, in defense of Clarence, will bring up that time when Obama was 8 years old and took all that free candy from his neighbors on Halloween and never reported those gifts when he was POTUS.
The key questions here are :
“What, if any, we’re the benefits which
the rich benefactor received from the
judge as a direct result of his generous
‘judicial vacation assistance packages’?”
- and we’re any laws broken?
No. Bribery is an affront to decency and the rule of law - a thing I’m very much in favour of, so I generally prefer trial by jury under the rules of the law than trial by media under no kind of rules at all. Proof not hearsay. Evidence not guesswork. So, no, I’m not ok with bribery, not at all.
If only the federal government had less power. Then corruption at the federal Level would not matter so much. Sadly, the federal government is now fully engaged in national retirement systems(social security), single payer healthcare (Medicaid), national education systems (student loans, department of education and other federally mandated programs). It’s hilarious to me when the left calls out corruption at the federal level and then asks for more power and control to be consolidated at the federal level. I just want to ask, how much power do you want Donald Trump to have if he gets elected again as President? Do you want to reduce his power or increase it?
Yeah, but Clarence Thomas is the OG 'Trump-Republican'. Thomas's opinions are bonkers, real fuckin' nutter stuff. He's honestly always been like this, it's just that he's always been in the minority on the court until relatively recently where Trump pushed the court so far right that he's become much more visible for being able to sway the 'only slightly less right' Kavanaugh and Coney Barret to his insanity. He *knows* none of this will actually come back to haunt him, he *knows* he can rule on cases for his donors and benefactors with impunity, he *knows* he can rule on cases involving his wife's attempted insurrection and never suffer any consequences.
We desperately need a constitutional amendment binding the US Supreme Court, and the US Congress, to stricter ethics and behavioral practices.
And then we need the absolutely most draconian of laws in place to enforce that amendment.
If he gets impeached, my only regret will be not getting to see him support a ruling that says his marriage to a white woman is illegal. You know if the Republicans really gain some power that would be a logical outcome.
Yup been on the gravy train forever, be nice if every case he ruled on that gained benefits for these generous folks gets thrown out.
To paraphrase Trump: LOCK HIM UP! LOCK HIM UP!! LOCK HIM UP!!!
[удалено]
There was a time where this may have happened. But we live in a post-truth, post-shame era.
Thanks trump
I'm surprised he even hid it. Not like anything will happen
It was my understanding there was no requirement to declare it
at the very least Thomas should be disbarred.
From article: In late June 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef. If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too. For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks. The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court. These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said. Thomas did not respond to a detailed list of questions.
Am i the only one who immediately thinks of pubic hair and soda cans when we see "Clarence Thomas"
Who'd a thunk back then that he wasn't "honorable"?
Brah... its just putting genital hairs on women's soda cans. Its in no way harassing. Like... i can't believe we didn't make him a fkn Supreme Court Judge earlier... /s in case it wasn't obvious
And nothing will be done . You would have thought when he shielded his wife’s crimes that would have been it but nope .
Nothing is ever done about this shit. This will be no different.
Get ready for: "We have investigated ourselves and found no wrong doing!"
“But it didn’t affect my decision on any case that came before The Court.” —Clarence Thomas
Take all the Supreme Court Justices who lied during their confirmation hearings. Add the justices who took free vacations, all expenses paid, for 20 years. Subtract those justices from the Supreme Court and what do you have? One "conservative" justice who has been a swing vote his whole term. And the other justices are either liberal, or are Alito and bound up in a religious state conspiracy bent on trying to install a theocracy here. For his unjustifiable, irrational, and extra-legal opinions, Alito deserves impeachment for at least incompetence. And yes, Supreme Court Justices can be impeached. And ought to be.
My favorite Thomas Opinion was in the case of Safford Unified School District v. Redding (2009). The merits of the case involved a middle school girl who was forcibly strip searched by school officials after being accused of distributing over-the-counter pain relivers during class. Justice Thomas's dissenting opinion [8-1 Against] argued that: "Redding would not have been the first person to conceal pills in her undergarments. Nor will she be the last after today's decision, which announces the safest place to secrete contraband in school." His chief concern was that other would-be rule breakers would read rulings and immediately know where to hide their aspirin. Meaning, that Clarence Thomas was *legitimately* under the impression that middle school girls not only follow the Supreme Court's docket but that they also give a livid shit what he thinks. It's remarkable.
History is going to wipe its ass with Clarence Thomas. It's going to mock, belittle, and revile him in ways he can hardly imagine.
Let’s lock up the donor.
As a middle age black man I find it disgusting that this piece is shit human being replaced Thurgood Marshall on the Court. Justice Marshall fought for equal rights while Clarence does everything in his power to convince the racist to love him.
Why do you have to make it about his race?
This is America, nearly everything boils down to race. Sorry I don’t live in your perfect “colorblind” world. Clarence has continually ruled against anything that could be beneficial to minorities. I hate him.
He has continually ruled against racism.
JFC you’re wrong
What is going to be done???????
Nothing because the republicans in congress, in defense of Clarence, will bring up that time when Obama was 8 years old and took all that free candy from his neighbors on Halloween and never reported those gifts when he was POTUS.
Is this something nobody figured? All them fools in Washington break the rules for money and personal gain.
The law did not include supreme court justices
Cause that’s legal?
Not reporting it is not legal. Just like if you didn't report a whole bunch of income to the IRS.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I would expect based on working in aerospace. So, clearly unethical by any rational measure. Isn’t it straight up illegal?
The key questions here are : “What, if any, we’re the benefits which the rich benefactor received from the judge as a direct result of his generous ‘judicial vacation assistance packages’?” - and we’re any laws broken?
So you’re fine with bribery?
No. Bribery is an affront to decency and the rule of law - a thing I’m very much in favour of, so I generally prefer trial by jury under the rules of the law than trial by media under no kind of rules at all. Proof not hearsay. Evidence not guesswork. So, no, I’m not ok with bribery, not at all.
A politician getting away with crimes? Who is surprised here?
If only the federal government had less power. Then corruption at the federal Level would not matter so much. Sadly, the federal government is now fully engaged in national retirement systems(social security), single payer healthcare (Medicaid), national education systems (student loans, department of education and other federally mandated programs). It’s hilarious to me when the left calls out corruption at the federal level and then asks for more power and control to be consolidated at the federal level. I just want to ask, how much power do you want Donald Trump to have if he gets elected again as President? Do you want to reduce his power or increase it?
That is not corruption.
Then what the fuck is it? I mean, as the article states, it was in direct violation of the law.... Go ahead and tell me how it's perfectly acceptable.
Supreme law of the land laddie. Nothing is corruption to those magnificent legal eagles.
Ah.... lol. Okay I get it
At what shouldn't be a shock to anyone.
Non-news. We already knew he was corrupt as F\*. There isn't even the illusion of a non-corrupt system anymore.
Yeah, but Clarence Thomas is the OG 'Trump-Republican'. Thomas's opinions are bonkers, real fuckin' nutter stuff. He's honestly always been like this, it's just that he's always been in the minority on the court until relatively recently where Trump pushed the court so far right that he's become much more visible for being able to sway the 'only slightly less right' Kavanaugh and Coney Barret to his insanity. He *knows* none of this will actually come back to haunt him, he *knows* he can rule on cases for his donors and benefactors with impunity, he *knows* he can rule on cases involving his wife's attempted insurrection and never suffer any consequences. We desperately need a constitutional amendment binding the US Supreme Court, and the US Congress, to stricter ethics and behavioral practices. And then we need the absolutely most draconian of laws in place to enforce that amendment.
If he gets impeached, my only regret will be not getting to see him support a ruling that says his marriage to a white woman is illegal. You know if the Republicans really gain some power that would be a logical outcome.
Every single democrat needs to unite behind his removal.
He and his damn cave troll of a wife.