Jump to content

The Supremes

tx 3 putt

By tx 3 putt
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13318

Posted
Posted

Even if Crow funneled this money to Thomas purely out of friendship, it's simultaneously outrageous and completed expected that Thomas is involved in this situation.

Here is how this will play out.

  • Thomas will submit amended financial reports. If he does this, you know Roberts somehow made him do it.
  • maybe, maybe have some level of public rebuke from Roberts.

Roberts will make some comment in the somewhat near future that the judicial branch must err of the side of caution in reporting financial transaction to maintain public trust. But he won't mention Thomas specifically in that remark.

On top of it, this situation and experience could very well make Thomas go even further in wanting to destroy more American freedoms.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 12.1k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Brisketexan
Brisketexan

Some people and posts above see this for the incredibly dangerous thing it is.  See the whole forest, not just the tree.  Roe is built on the bedrock of the 14th amendment and the inherent right to pr

Ghost of LL
Ghost of LL

The whole episode is pretty bad for the Court.  The leak is embarrassing.  But the decision is catastrophic. You've got a 5-4 decision to get rid of a something that has been settled as a constit

sidis
sidis

in one of the many instances in which i debunked your oversimplified, unsupported bullshit and you simply never responded, i addressed your absolutist contention that religious are more charitable tha

Posted Images

Nivek

Nivek 16691

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, ChiTownDoc said:

I mean going back to what the founding fathers put together.  Many of the concepts and definitively the terms you listed didn’t exist back then.  This one they should have seen coming as a potential disaster.  
 

‘The Judiciary Act of 1789 is passed by Congress and signed by President George Washington, establishing the Supreme Court of the United States as a tribunal made up of six justices who were to serve on the court until death or retirement.’

Fair.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5055

Posted
Posted

What is amazing to me is we are still talking about disclosure rather than ethics of act itself. Sure, Thomas not disclosing it is a red flag he knew how unethical it was. But disclosing it doesn’t cure the problem.

  • Hook 'Em 5
  • Rage+1 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13318

Posted
Posted

Another thing about Thomas to remember: when he received criticism for accepting gifts about 20 years ago, he STOPPED publicly reporting all gifts. We have no idea that this scandal stops with the Harlan Crow money and gifts. And does anyone not believe that plenty of money has been (legally?) funneled to Thomas via his wife's political activities?

 

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Rage+1 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Satchel

Satchel 6903

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Some might ask why a billionaire real estate mogul might want scrap property worth roughly their low-risk investment gains PER DAY.  I'm pretty sure Crow is way past the "buying up low income rental property" stage of his career.

This is so fucking obvious.

Nothing screams interest in residential property in a black neighborhood like billionaire real estate mogul.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tuco

Tuco 5055

Posted
Posted
[twice]yeah but since thomas didn't explicitly say he was giving judgements in exchange for gifts, there's absolutely nothing we can do about it because the judiciary is without fault[/horn]

Do you think that statement (the first part) is incorrect?
Fuck, the courts have backed up that politicians can profit from their positions as long as they don’t exchange “official acts” for compensation. (See Governor McDonnell.). Acknowledging the fucked up system is a necessary precursor to changing it.
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Pig Bellmont

Pig Bellmont 8637

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, wildcat09 said:

 

 

It's just an administrative stay, but I'm sure Alito hated doing this. 

I’m sure he did, too, but that underlying ruling is a huge huge mess. I don’t see how there are more votes than just Alito and Thomas on the standing issue alone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Fudge Nuggets

Fudge Nuggets 19001

Posted
Posted
On 4/10/2023 at 10:17 AM, YChang said:

Mmmm… I dunno, rich people collection by nature are different than normal people collections. I’m sure there’s a certain amount of, prestige among his buddies that he paid $$$ for a signed copy of the book. 

That's because his buddies are also grade-A shitheads.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Francisco 2.0

Francisco 2.0 32225

Posted
Posted

I'm just a simple man.

So, help me understand here; why would you claim income from a firm over the past two decades that has been defunct for [checks notes] since 2006?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/04/16/clarence-thomas-ginger-financial-disclosure/

 

Quote

Over the last two decades, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has reported on required financial disclosure forms that his family received rental income totaling hundreds of thousands of dollars from a firm called Ginger, Ltd., Partnership.

But that company — a Nebraska real estate firm launched in the 1980s by his wife and her relatives — has not existed since 2006.

That year, the family real estate company was shut down and a separate firm was created, state incorporation records show. The similarly named firm assumed control of the shuttered company’s land leasing business, according to property records.

 

Quote

Since that time, however, Thomas has continued to report income from the defunct company — between $50,000 and $100,000 annually in recent years — and there is no mention of the newer firm, Ginger Holdings, LLC, on the forms.

The previously unreported misstatement might be dismissed as a paperwork error. But it is among a series of errors and omissions that Thomas has made on required annual financial disclosure forms over the past several decades, a review of those records shows. Together, they have raised questions about how seriously Thomas views his responsibility to accurately report details about his finances to the public.

 

 

Quote

Thomas’s disclosure history is in the spotlight after ProPublica revealed this month that a Texas billionaire took him on lavish vacations and also bought from Thomas and his relatives a Georgia home where his mother lives, a transaction that was not disclosed on the forms. Thomas said in a statement that colleagues he did not name told him he did not have to report the vacations and that he has always tried to comply with disclosure guidelines. He has not publicly addressed the property transaction.

In 2011, after the watchdog group Common Cause raised red flags, Thomas updated years of his financial disclosure reports to include employment details for his wife, conservative activist Virginia “Ginni” Thomas. The justice said at the time that he had not understood the filing instructions. In 2020, he was forced to revise his disclosure forms after a different watchdog group found he had failed to report reimbursements for trips to speak at two law schools.

 

Spoiler

A judicial ethics expert said the pattern was troubling.

“Any presumption in favor of Thomas’s integrity and commitment to comply with the law is gone. His assurances and promises cannot be trusted. Is there more? What’s the whole story? The nation needs to know,” said Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics expert at New York University.

Gillers said all three branches of government should investigate Thomas’s compliance or noncompliance with federal ethics law. “The Supreme Court has been the glue that has held the republic together since 1790 with the Civil War the only interruption. We need the public to respect it even when it disagrees with it and to understand why it is important. Generally, the public has,” he said. “But that respect is now in serious jeopardy, and others must do something to stop the free fall.”

 

Thomas did not respond to emailed questions sent through a court spokeswoman. His wife also did not respond to requests for comment.

Thomas’s income from the firm he describes as “Ginger, Ltd., Partnership” on the financial disclosure forms has grown substantially over the last decade, though the precise amounts are unknown because the forms require only that ranges be reported. In total, he has reported receiving between $270,000 to $750,000 from the firm since 2006, describing it as “rent.” Thomas’s salary as a justice this year is $285,000.

The company’s roots trace back to two lakeside neighborhoods developed decades ago by Ginni Thomas’s late parents in a community in Douglas County, just outside of Omaha.

Ginger Limited Partnership was created in 1982 to sell and lease real estate, state incorporation records show, and its partners were Ginni Thomas, her parents and her three siblings. The firm owned and leased out residential lots in two developments, Ginger Woods and Ginger Cove, collecting rent annually from each occupied plot of land, according to copies of lease agreements on file with the county.

 

When he was nominated to a federal appeals court in 1990, Thomas listed the firm in a financial statement as one of his wife’s assets — worth $15,000 at the time.

The firm was dissolved in March 2006. Around the same time, Ginger Holdings, LLC was created in Nebraska, according to state records, which list the same business address as the shuttered company and name Joanne K. Elliott, the sister of Ginni Thomas, as manager.

The same month, the leases for more than 200 residential lots in Ginger Woods and Ginger Cove were transferred from Ginger Limited Partnership to Ginger Holdings, LLC, property records in Douglas County show.

Reached by phone, Elliott referred questions about the two companies to Ginni Thomas.

“You could call her and she could answer anything that she wants you to know,” Elliott said before hanging up.

Ginni Thomas is not named in state incorporation records related to Ginger Holdings, LLC.

In his most recent disclosure, in 2021, Thomas estimated that his family’s interest in Ginger Limited Partnership, the defunct firm, was worth between $250,000 and $500,000. He reported receiving an income from it between $50,000 and $100,000 that year.

 

On Friday, congressional Democrats with oversight of federal courts cited Thomas’s “apparent pattern of noncompliance with disclosure requirements” in calling on the Judicial Conference — the policymaking body for the federal courts — to refer him to the attorney general for an investigation into whether he violated federal ethics laws.

In addition to the recent revelations about Thomas’s financial relationship with Harlan Crow, the Texas billionaire, they cited a period in the 2000s in which Thomas failed to disclose his wife’s employment as required by law until the omission was reported by the watchdog group Common Cause.

Ginni Thomas earned more than $686,000 from the conservative Heritage Foundation from 2003 until 2007, according to the nonprofit’s tax forms. Clarence Thomas checked a box labeled “none” for his wife’s income during that period. He had done the same in 2008 and 2009 when she worked for conservative Hillsdale College.

 

Thomas acknowledged the error when he amended those filings in 2011. He wrote that the information had been “inadvertently omitted due to a misunderstanding of the filing instructions.”

In some years before those omissions, however, Thomas had correctly reported his wife’s employment.

Thomas failed to report the sale of the three Georgia properties to Crow in 2014, and he also continued to report that he owned a share of those properties as late as 2015, his disclosure forms show. In addition, beginning in 2010, his disclosures described the properties as being located in Liberty County, Ga., even though they were actually located in Chatham County.

Thomas also did not report reimbursement for transportation, meals and lodging while teaching at the universities of Kansas and Georgia in 2018. After the omission was flagged by the nonprofit Fix the Court, Thomas amended his filing for that year. He also amended his 2017 filing, on which he had left off similar reimbursements while teaching at Creighton Law School, his wife’s alma mater.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nice Guy Eddie

Nice Guy Eddie 13318

Posted
Posted
53 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Similar names.  I'm not saying it's not sketchy but it could just be a dumb error.

Nah.

Agree. Thomas from all appearances takes offense that he is expected to file disclosure statements and this could be a clerical error. Still I would question how these real estate firm is making income. Is Harlan Crow renting their buildings at 5x market value?

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 28563

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Smax said:

All 3 branches are bought and paid for, no shame, no morality. Does anyone think this will change? I don't they are all on $$ tit

I'd be pretty surprised if any of Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, or Ketanji Brown Jackson were secretly in a billionaire's pocket.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Smax

Smax 3799

Posted
Posted
I'd be pretty surprised if any of Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, or Ketanji Brown Jackson were secretly in a billionaire's pocket.
Maybe maybe not but I asked up thread about Thomas's comment about consulting colleagues about the gifts and trips and was advised it was ok not to report. Where these colleagues other scjs? Maybe
We don't see any of the names you listed speaking out about any of this have we? I view that as being complicit, similar to how good cops don't speak up about dirty cops
Link to comment
Share on other sites
nbmishoid

nbmishoid 904

Posted
Posted
30 minutes ago, Smax said:

Maybe maybe not but I asked up thread about Thomas's comment about consulting colleagues about the gifts and trips and was advised it was ok not to report. Where these colleagues other scjs? Maybe
We don't see any of the names you listed speaking out about any of this have we? I view that as being complicit, similar to how good cops don't speak up about dirty cops

Maybe pigs fly, Jesus. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
elguapo

elguapo 4555

Posted
Posted
31 minutes ago, Smax said:

Maybe maybe not but I asked up thread about Thomas's comment about consulting colleagues about the gifts and trips and was advised it was ok not to report. Where these colleagues other scjs? Maybe
We don't see any of the names you listed speaking out about any of this have we? I view that as being complicit, similar to how good cops don't speak up about dirty cops

Sure Jan GIF

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 28563

Posted
Posted
16 hours ago, Smax said:

Maybe maybe not but I asked up thread about Thomas's comment about consulting colleagues about the gifts and trips and was advised it was ok not to report. Where these colleagues other scjs? Maybe
We don't see any of the names you listed speaking out about any of this have we? I view that as being complicit, similar to how good cops don't speak up about dirty cops

It was almost certainly Scalia and possibly Rehnquist too.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
wildcat09

wildcat09 28563

Posted
Posted

Your periodic reminder that John Roberts is also a huge piece of shit:

 

Because it's totally cool and normal to cherry-pick a few of the less obviously threatening messages out of thousands to make fun of a stalking victim for being too sensitive.

  • Rage+1 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tchookem

tchookem 3895

Posted
Posted

Yes….IF I OR SOMEONE IN MY FAMILY CAPTURED IT. A war trophy is really freaking different than buying it as a “collectible.” Fuck buying any evil Hitler shit.
Seriously, what kind of shit human do you have to be when you have the kind of money that will fund college tuition for an entire urban school district, and you instead use it to buy Nazi artifacts that you keep in your study and show-off to other rich people?
  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45211

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, tchookem said:

Seriously, what kind of shit human do you have to be when you have the kind of money that will fund college tuition for an entire urban school district, and you instead use it to buy Nazi artifacts that you keep in your study and show-off to other rich people?

A Republican?

  • Hook 'Em 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...