SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck

[Larry]

Maybe it's just me.  But I look at this revelation, and it's not news.  

 

My feeling is that most* of the people at that level are the same way.  

 

It's just the way things are done, now.  Are fish even aware of the water?  

 

I'd be willing to bet that long before somebody becomes a Supreme Court Justice, or a Congressman, that you're simply used to the fact that there are people who would love to take you and your family to dinner.  Or on a cruise.  

 

And we all know that Crowe isn't just a "megadonor".  That when Thomas took those trips, he just happened to bump into people who just happened to want to talk about him about these cases he's considering.  And that those people just happen to be friends of Crowe, too.  

 

Crowe is the cutout man.  If you want to make a pitch to Clarence Thomas, you send some money to Crowe.  And maybe he'll arrange for you to happen to bump into him.  That way, your company never gave any money to Thomas.  It was just a coincidence because of your mutual friend.  

 

You don't meet Congressman Lardbutt in a parking lot with a suitcase with $10,000 in it, and tell him that this is for him voting yes on HB-1701.  You give his cousin a job that pays him $250,000 a year, that he doesn't need to show up for.  And then you simply trust that he'll get the hint.  

 

We all know that that's why Trump just happened to handle every Presidential decision, by sending one of his children to go "negotiate" with the other party.  He didn't even try to hide it.  Even "I'm not a politician" Candidate Trump, when Russia wanted to offer to hand him a "gift" (with no strings attached at all, we promise), he sent his children to go talk to the KGB agent who's making the offer.  Trump knew how to launder a bribe, even back when he was just a political candidate who wasn't expected to have a shot at winning.  

 

* I'm willing to admit the possibility that maybe there's one exception.  Somewhere.  

[The Evil Genius]

As someone who has worked with contracts at the State level for 22+ years now, I can say without a doubt that this should be a huge ****ing deal.

 

I personally have to take annual ethics training and fill out annual disclosure forms. Both talk at length about gifts from "friends" and what is and what isn't needed to be disclosed (hint, almost every gift does and some gifts cannot legally be accepted at all). I can only imagine being a judge would compound that risk and tarnish any and all appropriate appearance of impartiality. 

 

FYi in California, the gift limit total for the entire year from everyone for me would be $590 from certain sources. Now times that by 200,000 for Clarence and it's just a nothingburger? 🙄

 

 

Edited April 6, 2023 by The Evil Genius

[Captain Wiggles]

Milkshakes at Hagrids Hut.😒

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

 

[Larry]

Actually some - exculpatory information? - in here?  Might be worth hearing. 
 

The story is that apparently, Crowe, the donor?  Has a longstanding reputation for being really generous with vacations. With people who aren't politically connected. 
 

Doesn't mean that Thomas wasn't legally required to disclose. But it might make the things smell less. 
 

 

[The Evil Genius]

1 hour ago, Larry said:

Actually some - exculpatory information? - in here?  Might be worth hearing. 
 

The story is that apparently, Crowe, the donor?  Has a longstanding reputation for being really generous with vacations. With people who aren't politically connected. 
 

Doesn't mean that Thomas wasn't legally required to disclose. But it might make the things smell less. 
 

 

 

But the value of which is soooooo far beyond what is allowed that it should have been refused in the first place. That's what people are missing. Its very likely that Thomas could not ever legally accept these gifts. Which is why they likely weren't disclosed.

Edited April 7, 2023 by The Evil Genius

[bearrock]

5 hours ago, Larry said:

Actually some - exculpatory information? - in here?  Might be worth hearing. 
 

The story is that apparently, Crowe, the donor?  Has a longstanding reputation for being really generous with vacations. With people who aren't politically connected. 
 

Doesn't mean that Thomas wasn't legally required to disclose. But it might make the things smell less. 
 

 

 

It may smell like a meat that's been rotting for a month instead of two.  It's still rotten.  People have the right to know gifts accepted by Federal Judges and Judges have a legal duty to disclose them.  There really isn't much else to consider in this case.

[dfitzo53]

 

 

[Larry]

32 minutes ago, dfitzo53 said:

 

 

Yep. Letting a Supreme Court Justice take millions in gifts, every year, not disclosing them, ever, and shrugging your shoulders and doing nothing, will help the public trust SCOTUS more. 

[Long n Left]

9 hours ago, Larry said:

Actually some - exculpatory information? - in here?  Might be worth hearing. 
 

The story is that apparently, Crowe, the donor?  Has a longstanding reputation for being really generous with vacations. With people who aren't politically connected. 
 

Doesn't mean that Thomas wasn't legally required to disclose. But it might make the things smell less. 
 

 

And Crowe is a huge GOP donor. It would be naive to think that there was not some policy pushing involved, especially considering the other GOP movers and shakers that were present at the same time as Thomas.

[GoCommiesGo]

18 hours ago, The Evil Genius said:

As someone who has worked with contracts at the State level for 22+ years now, I can say without a doubt that this should be a huge ****ing deal.

 

I personally have to take annual ethics training and fill out annual disclosure forms. Both talk at length about gifts from "friends" and what is and what isn't needed to be disclosed (hint, almost every gift does and some gifts cannot legally be accepted at all). I can only imagine being a judge would compound that risk and tarnish any and all appropriate appearance of impartiality. 

 

FYi in California, the gift limit total for the entire year from everyone for me would be $590 from certain sources. Now times that by 200,000 for Clarence and it's just a nothingburger? 🙄

 

 

 

I'm a contracting officer at the federal level, if you accept a gift (you shouldn't) it has to be less than $20.00 per occasion and cannot exceed $50.00 for the year. Like you we take annual ethics training and have to fill out our annual disclosure for myself and spouse. 

 

The issue is not if you can do it, it's the perception that you create for the entirety of yourself and agency. It has always been told to me; the possible perception of impropriety is unacceptable. This to me is a huge deal, it's so far outside of what morally and ethically should be done. The ambiguity this creates is just outside of anything, and it may have had no influence on him, but the perception is there. That is the issue. 

 

But I'm sure they will investigate themselves and determine nothing wrong has been done. 

[The Evil Genius]

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

19 hours ago, Larry said:

Maybe it's just me.  But I look at this revelation, and it's not news.  

 

My feeling is that most* of the people at that level are the same way.  

 

It's just the way things are done, now.  Are fish even aware of the water?  

 

I'd be willing to bet that long before somebody becomes a Supreme Court Justice, or a Congressman, that you're simply used to the fact that there are people who would love to take you and your family to dinner.  Or on a cruise.  

 

And we all know that Crowe isn't just a "megadonor".  That when Thomas took those trips, he just happened to bump into people who just happened to want to talk about him about these cases he's considering.  And that those people just happen to be friends of Crowe, too.  

 

Crowe is the cutout man.  If you want to make a pitch to Clarence Thomas, you send some money to Crowe.  And maybe he'll arrange for you to happen to bump into him.  That way, your company never gave any money to Thomas.  It was just a coincidence because of your mutual friend.  

 

You don't meet Congressman Lardbutt in a parking lot with a suitcase with $10,000 in it, and tell him that this is for him voting yes on HB-1701.  You give his cousin a job that pays him $250,000 a year, that he doesn't need to show up for.  And then you simply trust that he'll get the hint.  

 

We all know that that's why Trump just happened to handle every Presidential decision, by sending one of his children to go "negotiate" with the other party.  He didn't even try to hide it.  Even "I'm not a politician" Candidate Trump, when Russia wanted to offer to hand him a "gift" (with no strings attached at all, we promise), he sent his children to go talk to the KGB agent who's making the offer.  Trump knew how to launder a bribe, even back when he was just a political candidate who wasn't expected to have a shot at winning.  

 

* I'm willing to admit the possibility that maybe there's one exception.  Somewhere.  

 

 

Anyway, no one should be surprised that Clarence Thomas is a piece of ****.

 

Wait, I can hear the calls in the distance now... "Witch hunt!!!!!"

[The Evil Genius]

Lol two gifts. ****ing asshole.

[Forehead]

Is Harlan Crow the George Soros of the conservative party?  Why aren't they using him as a Boogeyman?

 

Harlan "Jim (probably)" Crow funded January 6th or something.

[Cooked Crack]

Quote

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.

 

2019 must have counted as being early in his tenure

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

Harlan Crow is a great name for a Jack Reacher type character.

 

And Clarence can **** right off with that slapdick message.  "I didn't know the rules" isn't an excuse, especially when YOU ARE SITTING IN THE HIGHEST COURT OF ALL.  

 

It's like Stinger said in Top Gun 1, "You need to be doing it better, and cleaner than the other guy."  Anyway, hopefully Clarence is out on his ass flying cargo planes of rubber dog **** out of Hong Kong (or whatever the legal equivalent of that is).

[Captain Wiggles]

18 minutes ago, Forehead said:

Is Harlan Crow the George Soros of the conservative party?  Why aren't they using him as a Boogeyman?

 

He's not a Hungarian Jew so there's no need to be fearful. Crow is a WASP from Texas which is perfectly acceptable in Murica. 🤷‍♂️

[Forehead]

9 minutes ago, Captain Wiggles said:

 

He's not a Hungarian Jew so there's no need to be fearful. Crow is a WASP from Texas which is perfectly acceptable in Murica. 🤷‍♂️

 

I meant why aren't Democrats making him the Soros of the Conservatives.

[Captain Wiggles]

5 minutes ago, Forehead said:

 

I meant why aren't Democrats making him the Soros of the Conservatives.

 

Ah. Perhaps in time he'll be vilified like the Koch bros usta be. Hopefully all the Clarence Thomas stuff keeps being reported in the meantime. 

[PleaseBlitz]

I'm pretty surprised Thomas went with "I didn't know the rules" given his position as Spiffy correctly pointed out.

 

If I were him, by response would have been "Look, I'm Clarence Thomas.  I'm going to take the most right-wing position possible in all cases.  It's NOT POSSIBLE for these donations to influence me to be more right-wing or more business-friendly.  I'm already on the extreme end of that scale, I can't go further right, so these donations have no impact."

[LadySkinsFan]

5 hours ago, GoCommiesGo said:

 

I'm a contracting officer at the federal level, if you accept a gift (you shouldn't) it has to be less than $20.00 per occasion and cannot exceed $50.00 for the year. Like you we take annual ethics training and have to fill out our annual disclosure for myself and spouse. 

 

The issue is not if you can do it, it's the perception that you create for the entirety of yourself and agency. It has always been told to me; the possible perception of impropriety is unacceptable. This to me is a huge deal, it's so far outside of what morally and ethically should be done. The ambiguity this creates is just outside of anything, and it may have had no influence on him, but the perception is there. That is the issue. 

 

But I'm sure they will investigate themselves and determine nothing wrong has been done. 

 

As a proposal manager, I frequently had to undergo ethics training especially as regards gifts to government people of any stripe. When I worked at DEC, we gave frequent demos of equipment and applications. The only thing we gave away were mugs. If lunch was provided, the cost per person was provided so the government people could properly document it on their financials. 

 

Thomas is a creep and has been since his hearing. As a woman, I was appalled with his testimony and the disdain of Anita Hill's testimony by the Senators. Obviously he should be impeached but he won't be. 

[Dan T.]

5 hours ago, PleaseBlitz said:

I'm pretty surprised Thomas went with "I didn't know the rules" given his position as Spiffy correctly pointed out.

 

 

 

 

[The Evil Genius]

 

[The Evil Genius]

Yikes.