General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBoom (Ginni and Clarence)
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=uK3_8DkvrW-k4kNfawR_YQ
Legal? Ethical?
Certainly undermining, eh Roberts? How far does this one go?
bullimiami
(13,096 posts)Cracklin Charlie
(12,904 posts)About time someone reports on these fascists.
Please, please let there be more of this.
Etherealoc1
(256 posts)Lovie777
(12,274 posts)oh my. Fight.
Leghorn21
(13,524 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 4, 2022, 07:29 PM - Edit history (1)
Someone pointed out that the GQPers were having a COW when they thought Justice Sotomayor was dining with Chuck Schumer a week or so ago
Yep, they sure were
laughing and crying here!!!!!
multigraincracker
(32,687 posts)Investigation.
Skittles
(153,164 posts)they're all SICKENING
JHB
(37,160 posts)Last edited Fri Feb 4, 2022, 09:50 PM - Edit history (1)
One item on his meager pre-SC federal jurist track record was a lawsuit between Ralston Purina and ALPO Petfoods.
Purina was founded by the grandfather of Senator John Danforth, Thomas' friend and political mentor, and at the time (late 80s, early 90s) he and his extended family were the major shareholders. A decision in the case favorable to Purina was worth millions to them.
Clarence Thomas wasn't concerned with the appearance of conflict of interest (much less actual conflict of interest) and did not recuse himself. The decision was in Purina's favor.
This should have kept him off the SC long before anyone had ever heard of Anita Hill, but it got glossed over like a lot of other things, and he's been a faithful operative of the extreme right while on the Court ever since.
I remember the hearings - I remember thinking of the great Thurgood Marshall and wondering what he thought of that disgusting hack Thomas.
JHB
(37,160 posts)that describes him perfectly
JHB
(37,160 posts)Isn't that Dan Quayle's family?
LisaM
(27,813 posts)The Quayles and Danforth families are friends. So Clarence Thomas is loosely connected to the Quayles, no surprise.
JHB
(37,160 posts)In quick (~5min on Google) checking it's not clear why Danforth is is middle name. It doesn't derive from his grandparents.
The Danforths were family friends. (The "Dan" comes from his middle name). So there is a tenuous connection between Quayle and Thomas, but it's a thin one.
certainot
(9,090 posts)unamerican and can do nothing good and the cons can do nothing wrong, to the point where putin is better than any dem president
Bev54
(10,053 posts)I think she meant to say connive and conspire.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Let's see, who is the sole person on the planet with the unappealable and unchallengeable authority to recuse Justice Thomas?
Oh yeah. Never mind.
Captain Zero
(6,806 posts)I would think especially anything involving DeSantis.
Response to deminks (Original post)
Post removed
Kingofalldems
(38,458 posts)dchill
(38,502 posts)Did it suddenly become illegal? Whattya gonna do about it?
GB_RN
(2,356 posts)In any political/legal context. And his wife has not much more. Federal judicial ethics rules need...no MUST be applied to the SCOTUS. It's criminal that they are not.
Uncle Slappy should already have been impeached and convicted over his failure (for years) to report his wife's income on his financial declarations (his excuse that "I didn't know I had to" is pure BS).
Ziggysmom
(3,408 posts)There is no doubt in my mind that he committed perjury in his confirmation hearings. This pitiful specimen of a man had no business on any bench, much less the Supreme Court.
Lonestarblue
(10,011 posts)Several of Trumps first appointees had to resign because of ethics issues. Why shouldnt an unethical SC justice be forced to do the same? Of course, he would never do that with Democrats in control of the Senate.
Zeitghost
(3,862 posts)There is nothing illegal or improper about a Judge talking with a Governor or any other politician.
aggiesal
(8,916 posts)Gov: Fine Justice Thomas. Listen I have a campaign contributor that has a case coming in front of SCOTUS. Can you help make sure that the decision is favorable for my contributor? I'm sure your wife's non-profit would get a nice hefty donation, if that happened.
Thomas: Sure, I know the case. I'll see what I can do.
Zeitghost
(3,862 posts)It's not like SCotUS Justices are required to live as hermits. They are allowed to have friends and acquaintances.
aggiesal
(8,916 posts)Wait ... a judge should recuse themselves, not if they actually have a relationship with someone that might have an issue before the court, but just the appearance of a relationship.
Do you honestly believe that Justice Thomas would actually recuse himself, if a case dealing with Jan. 6th came before SCOTUS, while his wife's organization paid to bus people to the insurrection?
In 2004, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote an opinion declining to recuse himself in a case to which Vice President Dick Cheney was a party in his official capacity, despite the contention of several environmental groups that Scalia's participation created an appearance of impropriety because Scalia had recently participated in a widely publicized hunting trip with the Vice President. When Scalia went on the hunting trip, Cheney's case was either already on the SCOTUS docket or on track to be on the docket.
So you see, I don't really need proof, it just has to appear that it could be improper.
If the situation that I describe happens, where a case comes before SCOTUS of a contributor to DeathSantis, do you think Justice Thomas would recuse himself?
Zeitghost
(3,862 posts)That's it. There is no case before the court, there is no financial interest involved. As I said above, a Justice is under no obligation not to talk to people because maybe some day they might bring a case before the court.
I don't like Thomas, his wife or the Gov. but this is a nothingburger.
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)saying that her speaking to pro-choice groups meant she should recuse herself on issues of abortion.
MerryHolidays
(7,715 posts)How many other SCOTUS justices have a spouse so involved in inflammatory political issues? Do you really think this is normal?
Zeitghost
(3,862 posts)Thomas making contact with Desantis is a non-issue without a bunch of very pertinent details that do not exist outside the minds of some posters.
As for his wife's politics, she is entitled to speak and advocate as she pleases, the same as you and I. If a case directly involving her comes before the court, we will see what Thomas does. That so far has not happened.
If we found out Breyer's wife donated to planned parenthood and had made pro choice statements, would you expect him to recuse himself from the TX case?
MerryHolidays
(7,715 posts)Just as an FYI, given your "fact defender" role": https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/04/politics/ginni-clarence-thomas-supreme-court-recusal/index.html
turbinetree
(24,703 posts)how she became involved with people to go to the US Capital...to take down a duly elected government by voters....
Karadeniz
(22,528 posts)ShazzieB
(16,412 posts)The penultimate sentence of Ginni's request concluded with this: "...we are a cone of silence gathering."
Way to make this "gathering" sound like some sneaky, sinister cabal, Ginni. And in fact, that's exactly what it seems to be. From Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cabal
I guess "cone of silence" is meant to indicate confidentiality while avoiding "negative connotations of political purpose, conspiracy and secrecy."
Sorry, Ginni, it's not working for me!
Hassler
(3,379 posts)demtenjeep
(31,997 posts)yessssssss
AZLD4Candidate
(5,697 posts)MyOwnPeace
(16,927 posts)that really is the sum of it all - PRESIDENT OBAMA!!!!!!
What scum they are.......
dchill
(38,502 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)To resign from the Supreme Court. While she is at it she can take that weak kneed sock puppet with her.
Evolve Dammit
(16,736 posts)elias7
(4,007 posts)These people are absurd