Post New

It's always fun watching those with less than zero ethics lecture others about it. But as with everything in life, when a lib accuses you of doing something, there's a 100% chance they're already doing it.

Racist democrats have hated Clarence Thomas for literally decades so it's no wonder they're trying every trick in the book to boot him off the court. They can't stand the idea of an accomplished black man being a free thinker.

The problem is...for every accusation they hurl at him, they end up blasting one of their own. LOL!

https://www.dailywire.com/news/liberal-scotus-just...

Liberal SCOTUS Justice Took $3M From Book Publisher, Didn't Recuse From Its Cases
Random House was her main source of earned income, but she voted on key decision where publisher stood to lose money, even as similarly-positioned colleague recused.

OOOOPS. Recusal in the face of potential conflict is one of the most BASIC things judges do. But not Sotomayor, I guess. Let's read on!

In 2010, she got a $1.2 million book advance from Knopf Doubleday Group, a part of the conglomerate. In 2012, she reported receiving two advance payments from the publisher totaling $1.9 million.
...
In 2017, Sotomayor began receiving payments each year from Penguin Random House itself, which continued annually through at least 2021, the most recent disclosure available, and totaled more than $500,000. In all, she received $3.6 million from Penguin Random House or its subsidiaries, according to a Daily Wire tally of financial disclosures.

Was it unusual for other justice to recuse? Nope:
The Supreme Court does not reveal how individual justices vote when it comes to 'cert,' but it does note when they recuse, which Sotomayor did not. Her decision not to recuse is particularly notable because Breyer again recused. Breyer received payments from Penguin Random House or Knopf each year, which he seemingly viewed as a conflict, even though he received only a tenth of the amount ' $340,000 during the same time period ' as Sotomayor (Breyer's wife also wrote a book for the company).

So there we have it.

BTW - Thomas is far from the champion for bought and paid for trips, but that's another post.

Grade? Fail.

Dope1: Grade? Fail.

Well, Dope1 declares victory. Here's the thing, though: if Sotomayor doesn't have a valid reason for not recusing, we liberals believe that's a problem too and demands an ethics investigation.

So let's see... that's Thomas, Gorsuch, Roberts, Alito, and Sotomayor.

Sounds like the Supreme Court has an ethics problem.

Here's the thing, though: if Sotomayor doesn't have a valid reason for not recusing, we liberals believe that's a problem too and demands an ethics investigation.

So let's see... that's Thomas, Gorsuch, Roberts, Alito, and Sotomayor.

Sounds like the Supreme Court has an ethics problem.

1. The Supreme Court isn't answerable to hack democrats in Congress.

Like this one:

https://www.newsweek.com/democrat-sold-first-repub....
Representative Lois Frankel recently sold shares of First Republic Bank as well as purchased stock in JP Morgan, which on Monday took over First Republic following its collapse.

First Republic Bank (FRC) was seized by California regulators and sold to JPMorgan Chase (JPM), which will now assume responsibility for its debts and assets, on Monday. Shares in First Republic, a San Francisco-based bank founded in 1985, fell more than 75 percent last week after the bank announced that depositors withdrew $100 billion in March.

Ooops.

2. The leading trip-takers have all been left wing justices, Breyer and Ginsburg IIRC.

So get busy denouncing all of them. Loudly. Regularly.

And while you're at it, you need to prove your consistency and commitment to ethics by impeaching and removing Sonia Sotomayor. Get to work, now.

Dope1: The leading trip-takers have all been left wing justices, Breyer and Ginsburg IIRC.

First, you're wrong.

Justice Scalia was an enthusiastic traveler, taking more than 250 privately funded trips from 2004 to 2014. A few weeks before he died, he visited Singapore and Hong Kong. A court spokeswoman said there would be no disclosure form detailing Justice Scalia's travels in 2015.

Which leads me to a game we'll call 'spot the difference'.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg disclosed taking 14 trips in 2018.

Justice Stephen Breyer disclosed a dozen trips.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor got an advance from a book publisher and reported the income.

Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose the lavish trips he and his wife took that were paid for by Harlan Crow.

Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose that Harlan Crow had purchased his mother's home and additional property on her block, renovated the home, and allowed his mother to remain in the home rent free.

Justice Clarence Thomas failed to disclose that Harlan Crow paid the $6,000 a month tuition for a private school for a child Thomas and his wife took legal custody of and said he had raised as his own son.

Did you spot the difference?



https://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/23/us/politics/jus...

First, you're wrong.

Nah. You want to aim at Sen. Kennedy.

And to correct you:
Justice Sonia Sotomayor got an advance from a book publisher and reported the income.

That's not the issue. She refused to recuse herself while ruling on her publishing house's cases.

Big time ethical fail for a judge. Actually, that's Judging 101 kind of stuff.

Come on, now. Call loudly for her resignation.

If you want others to view your Thomas complaints as anything other than the naked partisanship - and outright racism - that it is.

In the end, the institutions are now corrupt, compromised and political.

"democracy!" his getting Sotomized.

Lol.

And like I've always said, they dont realize that these - are the good ol days.

Things will get really fun in just awhile

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.