The Supremes

[Sawbonz 28229]

Anyone want to break this down for us simple folk? Is the issue dead wrt revoking fda approval of the drug?

Edited April 22, 2023 by Sawbonz

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

36 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Anyone want to break this down for us simple folk? Is the issue dead wrt revoking fda approval of the drug?

Everything is back to normal like before the loser TX judge made an insane ruling- at least until appeals at the 5th Circuit and SCOTUS are over. 

[HenryJames 67394]

 

[nbmishoid 989]

Did not know you were an attorney.  Sad.

['stache 22145]

In a sane world that dissent would be an ethical violation and grounds for removal from office. He might as well have just written "I dissent because my religious bias precludes me from applying the law." No different than overturning a guilty verdict of a pedophile priest because "only god can punish a priest." The law is the law asshole, the drug was approved a long ass time ago and is safe as any other drug. 

[Horn Under a Bad Sign 20928]

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

No way Ginni wasn’t one of his “colleagues” who told him he didn’t have to report extra benefits from special interests. 

[HenryJames 67394]

On 4/22/2023 at 4:55 PM, nbmishoid said:

Did not know you were an attorney.

[Bama Chick 28596]

This seems fine.

[Gil Bang 26244]

these crooked fucks

 

For nearly two years beginning in 2015, Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch sought a buyer for a 40-acre tract of property he co-owned in rural Granby, Colo.

Nine days after he was confirmed by the Senate for a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court, the then-circuit court judge got one: The chief executive of Greenberg Traurig, one of the nation’s biggest law firms with a robust practice before the high court. Gorsuch owned the property with two other individuals.

On April 16 of 2017, Greenberg’s Brian Duffy put under contract the 3,000-square foot log home on the Colorado River and nestled in the mountains northwest of Denver, according to real estate records.

 

He and his wife closed on the house a month later, paying $1.825 million, according to a deed in the county’s record system. Gorsuch, who held a 20 percent stake, reported making between $250,001 and $500,000 from the sale on his federal disclosure forms.

Gorsuch did not disclose the identity of the purchaser. That box was left blank.

Since then, Greenberg Traurig has been involved in at least 22 cases before or presented to the court, according to a POLITICO review of the court’s docket.

They include cases in which Greenberg either filed amicus briefs or represented parties. In the 12 cases where Gorsuch’s opinion is recorded, he sided with Greenberg Traurig clients eight times and against them four times.

In addition, a Denver-based lawyer for Greenberg represented North Dakota in what became one of the more highly publicized rulings in recent years, a multistate suit which reversed former President Barack Obama’s plan to fight climate change through the Clean Air Act.

Gorsuch joined the court’s other five conservative judges in agreeing with the plaintiffs — including Greenberg’s client — that the Environmental Protection Agency had overstepped its authority by regulating carbon emissions from power plants in the decision that makes it more difficult for the executive branch to regulate emissions without express authorization from Congress.

Duffy, who in addition to serving as CEO is chief of Greenberg’s entire 600-lawyer litigation department, said he has never personally argued cases before Gorsuch or met the justice socially.

 

 

“I’ve never spoken to him,” Duffy said. “I’ve never met him.”

Once he learned Gorsuch was among the owners, Duffy said, he cleared the sale with his firm’s ethics department.

Gorsuch did not respond to inquiries about the sale, his disclosures or whether he should have reported Duffy’s identity as the purchaser.

Supreme Court rules do not prevent justices from engaging in financial transactions with people with interest in court decisions, but Gorsuch’s dealings with Duffy expose the weakness of the court’s disclosure procedures. For instance, in reporting his Colorado income, Gorsuch listed as his source only the name that he and his two co-owners gave themselves, Walden Group, LLC. The report didn’t indicate that there had been a real estate sale or a purchaser.

Such a sale would raise ethical problems for officials serving in many other branches of government, but the Supreme Court sets its own rules. It has largely left justices to make their own decisions about when and how to report outside gifts and income.

Justice Clarence Thomas is currently under scrutiny for accepting lavish trips from GOP billionaire donor Harlan Crow, who also purchased three Georgia properties from the justice. Thomas did not report the property sales. Of the vacations, Thomas said he had been advised that “personal hospitality from close friends” need not be disclosed.

 

LEGAL

Justice Clarence Thomas defends ‘family trips’ with GOP donor

BY EKATERINA PECHENKINA

Senate Judiciary Chair Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), a frequent critic of Supreme Court ethics rules, sent a statement responding to POLITICO’s inquiry about Gorsuch’s sale of the Colorado property.

“We have seen a steady stream of revelations regarding Supreme Court Justices falling short of the ethical standards expected of other federal judges and of public servants,” said Durbin. “The need for Supreme Court ethics reform is clear, and if the Court does not take adequate action, Congress must. The Senate Judiciary Committee will be closely examining these matters in the coming weeks,” said Durbin, who has asked Chief Justice John Roberts to testify next month on the court’s ethics rules.

 MOST READ

 

“This transaction appears to also require naming the buyer. The public has a right to know that justices will fully comply with disclosure rules instead of providing only a tiny peek into their financial disclosures,” he said, noting more facts are needed to distinguish whether it’s a disclosure omission or violation. The center was founded by a Republican former chair of the Federal Election Commission.

Unlike Crow, who bought properties from Thomas, Duffy says he is neither a friend nor a confidant of Gorsuch. But he is one of the nation’s most powerful attorneys.

His Greenberg bio describes him as “A true ‘working CEO,’” and says he “focuses his practice on trial and appellate work in the class action, employment, energy, commercial contract, and product liability areas, serving as counsel in high-profile cases throughout the United States.”

At the time of the sale, Duffy had headed Greenberg Traurig for about a year. A search of his contributions to political candidates revealed that they went primarily to Democrats, including Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, (D-N.Y.). He contributed the maximum amount allowable for individual donors to Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton in the 2016 election, though he also made contributions in the past to Republicans such as former Sen. John McCain of Arizona and a GOP New York City mayoral candidate, Joe Lhota.

The Duffy family has long resided in Colorado. Duffy attended the University of Colorado Law School and, in 2019, he was the recipient of the “most admired CEO” award by the Denver Business Journal.

Duffy, who described himself as an avid fly fisher, said he’d been looking for the right property for his family for many years. Duffy said he did not know Gorsuch was one of the owners when he made his first offer.

“The fact that he was going to be a Supreme Court justice was absolutely irrelevant to the purchase of that property. It’s a wonderful piece of property and we’re so glad we bought it,” said Duffy.

Gorsuch and his associates purchased the property in 2005 through their LLC, the Walden Group, which was dissolved after the 2017 sale. The home was originally listed, in July of 2015, for $2.495 million. The fact that the property had sat on the market for so long and that its price had been lowered a couple times suggests the partners were having trouble finding a buyer.

 

[David Dennison 19553]

That sinking feeling you get when you realize nothing will be done about any of this.

[Captainant 28562]

42 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

That sinking feeling you get when you realize nothing will be done about any of this.

God bless the Free Market Judiciary!

[Smax 3800]

Like I was saying above all these fucks are corrupt

[TexEx15 17953]

 

[mchookem 16771]

[Bama Chick 28596]

It’s not a fucking garden party, John.

And until an article comes out exposing Sotomayor or KBJ or Kagan have sold their mom’s house to some billionaire or go on vacations with some bigwig lefty donor then, no, they aren’t ALL fucking corrupt crooks.

[Smax 3800]

30 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

It’s not a fucking garden party, John.

And until an article comes out exposing Sotomayor or KBJ or Kagan have sold their mom’s house to some billionaire or go on vacations with some bigwig lefty donor then, no, they aren’t ALL fucking corrupt crooks.

 If they aren't on the take then they should be in front of cameras calling for Gorsuch and Thomas to step down, instead they are quiet, protecting their own just like cops...

Do you honestly have faith in the scotus right now? I sure don't we know at least 2 of them are on the payroll of extremist donors.

 

This country needs a reset

[Bama Chick 28596]

Being to reliant on old norms and the idea that institutions are unbreakable is one thing.

And that ain’t on the same page as being owned by a couple of billionaires.

Conflating the two is a shallow and weak argument.

I don’t trust SCOTUS because of six people - not nine.

[tx 3 putt 78704]

Fuck him and his mother ,,,,

 

[Stilicho 1422]

42 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Being to reliant on old norms and the idea that institutions are unbreakable is one thing.

And that ain’t on the same page as being owned by a couple of billionaires.

Conflating the two is a shallow and weak argument.

I don’t trust SCOTUS because of six people - not nine.

As a law student, having gotten a peak behind the curtain, I don't have a lot of faith in SCOTUS. Most of that can be tied directly to the "originalism shift" and the lack of any... logic of reasoning to a lot of Supreme Court caselaw. That being said, if the Sotomayor, Kagan, et al. have been on the take, stand them up and try them right alongside the fundamentalists.

If ever there's been this much concerted push from the public, Congress, and President calling for Supreme Court reform, I cannot remember it. Unless it was the conservative flip post-Miranda, which was before my time anyhow.

In any event, this is the best shot the country has had at forcing some rules on these motherfuckers. I hope folks keep digging. 

[wildcat09 29591]

11 hours ago, Smax said:

 If they aren't on the take then they should be in front of cameras calling for Gorsuch and Thomas to step down, instead they are quiet, protecting their own just like cops...

Do you honestly have faith in the scotus right now? I sure don't we know at least 2 of them are on the payroll of extremist donors.

 

This country needs a reset

Yes, they should be. They're not failing to do so because they're equally crooked though, they're failing to do so because they're political cowards who themselves have bought way too much into viewing SCOTUS as above politics.

[Smax 3800]

2 hours ago, wildcat09 said:

Yes, they should be. They're not failing to do so because they're equally crooked though, they're failing to do so because they're political cowards who themselves have bought way too much into viewing SCOTUS as above politics.

 

and that is why I made the comparison here a few days ago about how they are similar to the good cops who don't call out/report the dirty cops, at the end of the day they're complicit. 

 

Regardless these are highest judges in the land deciding some of the most important cases that impact everyone and we have 2 of those judges who have shown they have poor judgement. Thomas and Gorsuch need to be removed and the SC needs to be revamped. Lifetime appointments have proven to be a bad idea and term limits need to be implemented.

[nbmishoid 989]

Yea, the thin black line.

[Longhorn_Fan68 34106]

cool cool cool cool cool cool 

[DDD Dad 14654]

Unpopular opinion here but I don’t get the outrage over the Gorsuch story. If i understand the story correctly he was a part owner of a vacation home that sold on the open market below listing price.

If the issue is that the failure to disclose the buyer on his reporting form is some evidence of malfeasance, okay. But it is a FAR cry from the sort of shit Clarence has been up to with his personal pal Harlan, who loves him just because they have so much in common, and not because Harlan wants any preferential treatment. 

Edited May 5, 2023 by DDD Dad

[gmr548 16702]

Unpopular opinion here but I don’t get the outrage over the Gorsuch story. If i understand the story correctly he was a part owner of a vacation home that sold on the open market below listing price.
If the issue is that the failure to disclose the buyer on his reporting form is some evidence of malfeasance, okay. But it is a FAR cry from the sort of shit Clarance has been up to with his personal pal Harlan, who loves him just because they have so much in common, and not because Harlan wants any preferential treatment. 

I mean, leaving who it sold to and when out of your description is omitting some pretty significant information.

If the Gorsuch stuff happened on its own 10-20 years ago it would be a headline. This is only a take now because the system continues to deteriorate before our eyes.

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

On 4/25/2023 at 10:30 PM, Bama Chick said:

It’s not a fucking garden party, John.

Then the Senate should find a way to send some subpoenas. Otherwise they aren’t serious about checks and balances 

[Gatorubet 30726]

Quote

Justice Clarence Thomas is currently under scrutiny for accepting lavish trips from GOP billionaire donor Harlan Crow, who also purchased three Georgia properties from the justice. Thomas did not report the property sales. Of the vacations, Thomas said he had been advised that “personal hospitality from close friends” need not be disclosed.

I just wish Harlan had been named “Jim” as a baby. 

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

23 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Then the Senate should find a way to send some subpoenas. Otherwise they aren’t serious about checks and balances 

What happens when those subpoenas are ignored?

[Pig Bellmont 8887]

7 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

What happens when those subpoenas are ignored?

Roberts would respect a subpoena. He’s not Steve Bannon. And we won’t find out because Durbin and Schumer have their heads up their asses

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

6 minutes ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Roberts would respect a subpoena. He’s not Steve Bannon. And we won’t find out because Durbin and Schumer have their heads up their asses

I don’t believe for a second that Roberts would respect a subpoena. He’d come up with some colorful way of saying, “I don’t need to speak to you. Fuck off”

[Dahobbs 18328]

1 hour ago, DDD Dad said:

Unpopular opinion here but I don’t get the outrage over the Gorsuch story. If i understand the story correctly he was a part owner of a vacation home that sold on the open market below listing price.

If the issue is that the failure to disclose the buyer on his reporting form is some evidence of malfeasance, okay. But it is a FAR cry from the sort of shit Clarance has been up to with his personal pal Harlan, who loves him just because they have so much in common, and not because Harlan wants any preferential treatment. 

I agree with this. The non-disclosure is definitely problematic and is an example why we need more concrete ethical guidelines for Supreme Court Justices. But I don't believe there is much here to indicate some nefarious purpose behind the purchase of the property. 

[WhatTheBuck 28931]

The reporting I heard was that Gorsuch was trying unsuccessfully to unload that property for a long time. Then suddenly when he became a Supreme Court Justice he found a buyer who just happened to be someone who had interest in cases before the court. Sounds pretty fishy.

[Skipper 6411]

2 hours ago, DDD Dad said:

Unpopular opinion here but I don’t get the outrage over the Gorsuch story. If i understand the story correctly he was a part owner of a vacation home that sold on the open market below listing price.

If the issue is that the failure to disclose the buyer on his reporting form is some evidence of malfeasance, okay. But it is a FAR cry from the sort of shit Clarance has been up to with his personal pal Harlan, who loves him just because they have so much in common, and not because Harlan wants any preferential treatment. 

This.  When I read it the other day I thought it was a non-story and was surprised by all the takes. This is not even remotely in the same ballpark as the Thomas story.

[Smax 3800]

The reporting I heard was that Gorsuch was trying unsuccessfully to unload that property for a long time. Then suddenly when he became a Supreme Court Justice he found a buyer who just happened to be someone who had interest in cases before the court. Sounds pretty fishy.

This doesn't pass the smell test by any means

As for Robert's not ignoring a subpoena, bitch please these justices think they are above the law just look at the statement they all signed and released yesterday, its a fucking joke.
The more of this type of stuff that comes to light the further down Briskets rabbit hole I follow, we are fucked as a country and I don’t see us coming back.

[kevwun 16441]

He tried for a couple years to sell a property.  Then he becomes a Justice and all of a sudden it sells in days to someone who has a case before the court.  That's the opposite of a non-story.

[The Royal We 3100]

5 minutes ago, kevwun said:

He tried for a couple years to sell a property.  Then he becomes a Justice and all of a sudden it sells in days to someone who has a case before the court.  That's the opposite of a non-story.

This. It's a mighty big coincidence - ESPECIALLY when you consider that he forgot to disclose it. Oops!

I think some of you have become desensitized to fuckery. There are certainly degrees of fuckery and this isn't nearly as egregious as Thomas' numerous issues, but this is still out and out fuckery.

[kevwun 16441]

And there's something like this with multiple Justices.  Remember how Kavanaugh's debts magically disappeared?

[jimmyjazz 47221]

6 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

I think some of you have become desensitized to fuckery. 

Agreed, and it's intentional.  It's a siege mentality -- "oh look, here comes another round, oh well, nevertheless".

People get worn down and these fuckers know it.  The more successful they are at doing it, the harder it will be to reverse course.

[The Royal We 3100]

Right. Just smear shit all over the place and then people won't even be annoyed by the stench.

Well, it does smell a little funny, but I don't see any shit stains on Gorsuch himself, so what's the big deal?

Fuck that, we should be concerned and investigate any time we smell something foul.

[David Dennison 19553]

2 hours ago, Pig Bellmont said:

Then the Senate should find a way to send some subpoenas. Otherwise they aren’t serious about checks and balances 

Have some hearings and call it a day.

Sigh.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Unpopular opinion here but I don’t get the outrage over the Gorsuch story. If i understand the story correctly he was a part owner of a vacation home that sold on the open market below listing price.
If the issue is that the failure to disclose the buyer on his reporting form is some evidence of malfeasance, okay. But it is a FAR cry from the sort of shit Clarance has been up to with his personal pal Harlan, who loves him just because they have so much in common, and not because Harlan wants any preferential treatment. 

The buyer is partner in a firm that has had double digit cases in front of SCOTUS since the sale.

And he didn’t disclose that.

That’s fucking crooked.

[Bama Chick 28596]

Also, if something isn’t crooked, why hide it?

Remember when the “appearance of impropriety” was a thing?

I remember.

[DDD Dad 14654]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

The reporting I heard was that Gorsuch was trying unsuccessfully to unload that property for a long time. Then suddenly when he became a Supreme Court Justice he found a buyer who just happened to be someone who had interest in cases before the court. Sounds pretty fishy.

 

1 hour ago, Smax said:

This doesn't pass the smell test by any means

 

1 hour ago, kevwun said:

He tried for a couple years to sell a property.  Then he becomes a Justice and all of a sudden it sells in days to someone who has a case before the court.  That's the opposite of a non-story.

 

1 hour ago, The Royal We said:

This. It's a mighty big coincidence - ESPECIALLY when you consider that he forgot to disclose it. Oops!

I think some of you have become desensitized to fuckery. There are certainly degrees of fuckery and this isn't nearly as egregious as Thomas' numerous issues, but this is still out and out fuckery.

Look, I get it that there appears to be some seriously questionable issues surrounding several of the SCOTUS justices.  I just think this particular transaction (the sale to the Greenberg Traurig CEO who happens to live in Denver) doesn't rise to a level to cause me to be outraged.

Frankly, I think the more curious transaction isn't the sale of this property (which Gorsuch held only a 20 percent stake for essentially timeshare rights to use the fishing cabin).  It's the original purchase.  Based on the NYT article, the property was purchased and cabin was built by an LLC that Gorsuch owned along with two other investors who happened to be "lieutenants of [billionaire and major conserviative donor Philip F.] Anschutz."  Again, per the article, "Ansczuch lobbied Colorado's lone Republican senator and the George W. Bush administration to nominate Mr. Gorsuch to an appeals court seat in 2006."

So if you're looking for bogeymen, perhaps digging a little deeper gets you to some meat.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/25/us/neil-gorsuch-property-sale.html

 

Also, csb, the priest at my former church, St. Michaels and All Cadillacs (actually All Angels) was also named Anschutz.  He was most definitely NOT a major conservative donor.  He was very much a liberal (you know, real Christian) who preached to one of the wealthiest congregations in Dallas.  We ended up leaving that parish after he moved back east.

Edited April 27, 2023 by DDD Dad

[DDD Dad 14654]

10 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

The buyer is partner in a firm that has had double digit cases in front of SCOTUS since the sale.

And he didn’t disclose that.

That’s fucking crooked.

There's nothing that required him to disclose the identity of the purchaser (coincidentally I used to work at Greenberg Traurig, though it was long before they had a Denver office).  Again, Gorsuch was a minority owner in the property.  

I mean, I guess if someone wanted to dig deeper to see if Gorsuch was in some sort of cash crunch (such as needing to cash out of the vacation house to afford to move to DC), perhaps that would be worth pursuing.  But standing alone, I just don't get the outrage over that particular transaction.  Note my comment above about the original purchase.

Edited April 27, 2023 by DDD Dad

[wildcat09 29591]

It's pretty  simple: we should have higher standards for SCOTUS justices than everyone else, not lower. Gorsuch's sale may not have been knowingly corrupt, but was still the sort of thing we shouldn't permit because you start allowing that shit and before you know it you're dealing with Clarence Thomas.

[The Royal We 3100]

21 minutes ago, DDD Dad said:

There's nothing that required him to disclose the identity of the purchaser. 

Kinda the whole point here.

And when legislation is proposed that would require the USSC to establish their own ethics code, Turtle shoots that down as an attempt by the left to tear down the "conservative" justices. We can't even ask them to formally police themselves with a binding code, nope, that's a witch hunt!

 

ETA - you make a fair point though and I was actually under the impression that they were required to disclose such things. I see there's a place on the disclosure form (linked in your NYT article) for listing the buyer, but all of these were blank on Gorsuch's form.

Edited April 27, 2023 by The Royal We

[DDD Dad 14654]

8 minutes ago, The Royal We said:

Kinda the whole point here.

And when legislation is proposed that would require the USSC to establish their own ethics code, Turtle shoots that down as an attempt by the left to tear down the "conservative" justices. We can't even ask them to formally police themselves with a binding code, nope, that's a witch hunt!

 

I get that and that's why I said that if the concern was over the failure to disclose the identity of the buyer, "okay."  However, I just don't think that, of itself, is something that outrages me.  It happens to be a matter of public record (one could simply review the deed records for the sale).  So it's not like he was actively concealing anything, especially when the disclosure wasn't required.  

Sure, I'm in favor of requiring SCOTUS judges to disclose that sort of information.  But lighting tiki torches and storming the courthouse over this particular lack of disclosure in this instance seems somewhat overly reactionary.

ETA: I overlooked your point about turtle shooting down proposed legislation as attempts to tear down justices, etc.  I agree with the outrage over his hypocrisy.

Edited April 27, 2023 by DDD Dad

[HenryJames 67394]

Ginni Thomas’ January 6th lawyer says everything is cool.

[bolverk 30343]

Fucked up story about omissions in the Senate investigation on the Kavanaugh accusations during his hearings.

• Yalie FedSoc Colorado lawyer, Joseph Smith, sent an email to his friend, Mike Davis, judiciary committee’s then lead counsel (also FedSoc member) stating that the accusation that Yalie FedSoc member Kavanaugh had waived his dick in the face of Ramirez was a case of mistaken identity. In fact, it was likely fellow Yalie and Republican activist, Jack Maxey, who also had a reputation for exposing his willy at parties. It's also important to note that Smith, like Kavanaugh was also a member of the legal team for Yalie Bush in the Florida election shenanigans in 2000.
• Wang wagging Maxey says it couldn't have been him because he was still a senior in high school at the time of the incident. This dick has gained prominence among conservatives for sharing data from the laptop of Yalie and wielder of the tremendous sexcalibur, Hunter Biden, with members of the media. When reached out to for this story, he said he was currently in Europe and had “just” given the same fucking hard drive to that tallywhacker Orban in Hungary.
• Meanwhile, we learn another Yalie, Max Stier (married to a prominent judge on the US court of appeals in Washington), had wanted to testify anonymously to fellow Yalie Christopher Wray's FBI that wienie-waving Kavanaugh had pulled similar shit at another party but was denied an interview in that sham investigation. This all will be included in an upcoming documentary.

What an incestuous cadre of cocks, all from some dumb dildo dick school in Connecticut, running and ruining our gotdam country.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/28/brett-kavanaugh-investigation-omissions-senate-sexual-assault-claims