Will Georgia indict? May find out tonight! Update: Posted Jan 9 finally indicted Aug 14.

[Greenman]

Well I don't know what you mean by 'hide' but he deliberately chose not to disclose the value of the gifts on his federally mandated disclosure forms. He disclosed them one year in the past and then when he got flak for it stopped, so at least at one point he was aware that this was required. It was discovered by ProPublica and once the scandal erupted he went back and 'amended' all his disclosures to include massive, previously secret gifts from people with business before the court.

If he were any other judge he would have been subject to discipline and/or impeachment for this blatant violation of the judicial ethics code.

I'll have to look into that. I wasn't aware he had received gifts, the story I read some time back claimed it was hospitality and not subject to reporting.
If he was receiving unreported gifts or money then he absolutely should be held accountable.

 

[cytg111]

Because I shared a news item you don't like?
I didn't write the story, I didn't find the information, I didn't claim it was accurate, I didn't state I accepted it as fact. Precisely what part of that is gullible?

Yes its like totally neutral language, just words strung together, nothing deducible beyond letters of the alphabet was involved. You might need Congress to subpoena those letters to get to the bottom of this. Its important to get to the bottom of this. And of course if letters were improperly hitched throw the book at them.

I mean it's so interesting.


And so predictable

I'll have to look into that. I wasn't aware he had received gifts, the story I read some time back claimed it was hospitality and not subject to reporting.
If he was receiving unreported gifts or money then he absolutely should be held accountable.

So predictable that what you pick up is the equivalent of a retracted Kardashian story while having managed to dodge the entire tonnage of reporting on Clarence's misdealing's and taking bribes. No I am not gonna link you up. You do you boo.


This is your entire thing

Wouldn't that be cool. Though I can tell you what the conclusion's reached are without even looking at it.

You know what the conclusion is, therefor you gonna avoid the evidence that lead to that conclusion. That's some stellar deductive work counselor. Its restarded. But stellar non the less.

 

[fskimospy]

I'll have to look into that. I wasn't aware he had received gifts, the story I read some time back claimed it was hospitality and not subject to reporting.
If he was receiving unreported gifts or money then he absolutely should be held accountable.

While luxury vacations and trips aboard private jets were absolutely subject to reporting and he knew this, if you're looking for something more tangible here you go:

Justice Thomas’s R.V. Loan Was Forgiven, Senate Inquiry Finds (Published 2023)

The justice failed to repay much, perhaps all, of the $267,230 loan. His benefactor wiped the slate clean, with ethical and potential tax consequences.

www.nytimes.com

So basically he was given a sweetheart, otherwise unobtainable loan for a $500,000 (in 2024 dollars) RV and chose not to tell anyone. Then later when the guy who gave him the loan just forgave hundreds of thousands of dollars he was supposedly owed Thomas decided not to mention that either.

 

[Greenman]

Yes its like totally neutral language, just words strung together, nothing deducible beyond letters of the alphabet was involved. You might need Congress to subpoena those letters to get to the bottom of this. Its important to get to the bottom of this. And of course if letters were improperly hitched throw the book at them.

I mean it's so interesting.


And so predictable


So predictable that what you pick up is the equivalent of a retracted Kardashian story while having managed to dodge the entire tonnage of reporting on Clarence's misdealing's and taking bribes. No I am not gonna link you up. You do you boo.


This is your entire thing


You know what the conclusion is, therefor you gonna avoid the evidence that lead to that conclusion. That's some stellar deductive work counselor. Its restarded. But stellar non the less.

Your examples here have nothing to do with the story I posted and you commented on.
We did go down the "what about" path, as we always do, and got into Thomas. I responded with the little I know about that situation and closed with pretty much the same thing I said about the original story. If they're guilty, punish them.
I understand you get butt hurt because I won't jump on your bandwagon, but at least do me the curtesy of reading the actual words I post and not what you want to believe I said.

 

[Moonbeam]

When you have snowflake cadet bone spurs no need to look for that unicorn.

That was supposed to be save US not save UP from. DT is a man child, not a prince or a person who senses what is wrong with the world. Real people are rare and fortunately for us so are narcissist psychopaths like him. The problem is that our insecurity in our lives from the mad world we create, needlessly produces a need for security from childhood fears that can be easily manipulated by a pretend strong daddy figure who cares actually only about himself.

 

[Greenman]

While luxury vacations and trips aboard private jets were absolutely subject to reporting and he knew this, if you're looking for something more tangible here you go:

Justice Thomas’s R.V. Loan Was Forgiven, Senate Inquiry Finds (Published 2023)

The justice failed to repay much, perhaps all, of the $267,230 loan. His benefactor wiped the slate clean, with ethical and potential tax consequences.

www.nytimes.com

So basically he was given a sweetheart, otherwise unobtainable loan for a $500,000 (in 2024 dollars) RV and chose not to tell anyone. Then later when the guy who gave him the loan just forgave hundreds of thousands of dollars he was supposedly owed Thomas decided not to mention that either.

That's a really strange story. Thomas paid $160k in interest over 8 years on an RV, and never a nickel towards the principle, only to have the the entire original amount forgiven. It absolutely should be investigated, it actually sounds like a tax scam along with a questionable gift to me.

 

[Moonbeam]

Your examples here have nothing to do with the story I posted and you commented on.
We did go down the "what about" path, as we always do, and got into Thomas. I responded with the little I know about that situation and closed with pretty much the same thing I said about the original story. If they're guilty, punish them.
I understand you get butt hurt because I won't jump on your bandwagon, but at least do me the curtesy of reading the actual words I post and not what you want to believe I said.

Can irrational people be reached by reason or do unconscious feelings they have, my alternative opinion I am asking you to consider, attachments to things they consider to be the good and are therefore unconsciously vested in, provide their real motivation. Maybe cytg11 reacts to you because the ideas you present take on colors not intended because he sees you as dangerous to something he holds sacred.

 

[Greenman]

Can irrational people be reached by reason or do unconscious feelings they have, my alternative opinion I am asking you to consider, attachments to things they consider to be the good and are therefore unconsciously vested in, provide their real motivation. Maybe cytg11 reacts to you because the ideas you present take on colors not intended because he sees you as dangerous to something he holds sacred.

I'd say that's right on the mark.
I'll also note that when you're honest with yourself, it's a lot easier to be honest with others.

 

[Moonbeam]

That's a really strange story. Thomas paid $160k in interest over 8 years on an RV, and never a nickel towards the principle, only to have the the entire original amount forgiven. It absolutely should be investigated, it actually sounds like a tax scam along with a questionable gift to me.

It goes far far deeper in my opinion. Depending on how laws are decided can make or break huge swums of money corporations are in a position to make if the laws favor their business modles. Environmental interests put your and my health at risk but can save corporations billions if they can legally indifferent to them. Trump can run for president if the 14th does not apply to him. Biden is more likely to regulate so for some Trump represents money in the bank. In return his sheep get to feel they fucked someone.

 

[iRONic]

The pretzel-ing up in here…

Shitlol

 

[Moonbeam]

I'd say that's right on the mark.
I'll also note that when you're honest with yourself, it's a lot easier to be honest with others.

The problem is that when we confront ourselves we run into the same unconscious issues that blind us elsewhere. For me honesty cost me everything I held sacred. It is somewhat analogous to the story of Abu Kassim's slippers:

Shoes of Abu Kassim, The: An Arabic Folktale

Retold and Illustrated by Claire Mangasarian In the tale of The Shoes of Abu Kassim, Abu Kassim, a wealthy but miserly man, is renowned throughout the city of Baghdad for his ancient patched and stained shoes. Everyone in the city recognizes the footwear and knows their owner. Men raise their...

naasr.org

 

[Lost_in_the_HTTP]

Did any of this happen in Georgia?

 

[eelw]

Did any of this happen in Georgia?

Lol yeah last few pages been OT. But with nothing new on this front, nothing else to rant about

 

[fskimospy]

Did any of this happen in Georgia?

Yes actually, haha.

Clarence Thomas' lawyer says a billionaire bought his mom's house because it was in a 'blighted' neighborhood full of 'junkies' and they wanted to help her keep living there

As part of the deal, Crow guaranteed Thomas' mother that she could continue to live in the house, and its then-'blighted' neighborhood, in perpetuity.

www.businessinsider.com

 

[JD50]

LMAO Greenman don't ever change

 

[Greenman]

LMAO Greenman don't ever change

That seems unlikely at this point.

 

[gothuevos]

Teflon Don.

Anyone seriously still deluded enough to think he'll see any repercussions?

Trump: Georgia case ‘totally compromised’ after allegations against Fani Willis

Former President Trump on Tuesday insisted the case against him and several others in Georgia over efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 election results should be dropped after another defend…

thehill.com

 

[fskimospy]

Teflon Don.

Anyone seriously still deluded enough to think he'll see any repercussions?

Trump: Georgia case ‘totally compromised’ after allegations against Fani Willis

Former President Trump on Tuesday insisted the case against him and several others in Georgia over efforts to overturn the state’s 2020 election results should be dropped after another defend…

thehill.com

Even if true, and they admit they have no evidence, it would have no legal impact on the case. Lol.

Needed a new load in your pants I see?

 

[fskimospy]

It’s funny how the ‘Trump is going to get away with it!’ people keep grasping at more and more pathetic straws because apparently they enjoy feeling this way.

It’s deeply weird.

 

[Fenixgoon]

It’s funny how the ‘Trump is going to get away with it!’ people keep grasping at more and more pathetic straws because apparently they enjoy feeling this way.

It’s deeply weird.

well he's not in an orange jumpsuit yet...so i don't blame people for being pessimistic about it. he's avoided consequences his entire life.

 

[fskimospy]

well he's not in an orange jumpsuit yet...so i don't blame people for being pessimistic about it. he's avoided consequences his entire life.

I think people have made a category error here.

When he was president he was genuinely untouchable for all intents and purposes. People seemed to think he was going to be jailed then or whatever.

Now that he’s not president he’s very very much not untouchable.

If people want to argue that he will become president again before he is convicted that’s fine but that’s the only way he gets out of this. Otherwise he is going to prison (or dies first)

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

I'll have to look into that. I wasn't aware he had received gifts, the story I read some time back claimed it was hospitality and not subject to reporting.
If he was receiving unreported gifts or money then he absolutely should be held accountable.

When you're a supreme court justice, stuff over like $5 isn't hospitality, it's a bribe. Doubly so when it's coming from people literally presenting shit to your docket.

 

[fskimospy]

When you're a supreme court justice, stuff over like $5 isn't hospitality, it's a bribe. Doubly so when it's coming from people literally presenting shit to your docket.

If I accepted what Thomas accepted I would be 100% fired and be fined a shitload of money.

In the scheme of things I’m not particularly fancy. The idea that the ethics rules that bind me are so much stronger than the Supreme Court is an embarrassment.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

If I accepted what Thomas accepted I would be 100% fired and be fined a shitload of money.

In the scheme of things I’m not particularly fancy. The idea that the ethics rules that bind me are so much stronger than the Supreme Court is an embarrassment.

Yep, logically the more powerful a person's position is, the more restrictive things like gifting should be. Realistically it's the opposite, which says a lot about the power structures we've collectively decided to support.

 

[fskimospy]

Yep, logically the more powerful a person's position is, the more restrictive things like gifting should be. Realistically it's the opposite, which says a lot about the power structures we've collectively decided to support.

I completely agree. Hence the source of my outrage.

I have ten staff and I would get murdered for this. Thomas is making policy for the whole country and nobody cares.