The mistake people make is believing that these people have integrity. Maybe rarely that is true but more often than not it's like anyone who gets power, they just rationalize their decisions but the decisions are what they personally want.
Thomas probably consulted Kavanaugh while K was 'loving' his beer.
CJ Roberts proves my point. He had his fingers in the cookie jar by proxy via his wife taking in millions.Some ConLaw professors actually still regard the current Supreme Court as some kind of holy priesthood. Luckily it's the other ConLaw professors who drink at my bar.
The Chief Justice has been almost fanatical in his desire to portray the Court as just this sort of high priesthood. He'll naturally succeed with many lay Americans. But bluster will get you only so far, especially since Justice Thomas got his hand stuck in the cookie jar and can only hold it behind his back for so long. Will anything substantive happen? No, but C.J. Roberts' job just got a whole lot harder.
What also happens is that these people really do believe they are respectable and honorable because they hold the office. "I'm a Supreme Court justice, therefore my reasoning is impeccable and you must respect it." What happens when the conman (conperson?) actually starts believing their own hype?
That's on point. If you go back to the Thomas confirmation after-hearings, you can see a clear parallel in the Kavanaugh hearings; it's a tried-'n'-true Republican shuffle: "Waaaaahhhh!! No, I'm the victim!"
My previous post was intended to include the information that Clarence Thomas has attended at least two such gatherings, according to ProPublica.
But is it really bribery if he was going to vote against the poor and working class anyway?
It depends on whether you are a different dualist or not: then it's a question of corrupted Soul or corrupted Body
Consider that these SCOTUS justices have the opportunity to influence their colleagues. So it's not just the one vote.But is it really bribery if he was going to vote against the poor and working class anyway?
But is it really bribery if he was going to vote against the poor and working class anyway?
Desus Nice chats about the latest news including Clarence Thomas not reporting a $250,000 forgiven loan on his tax returns, New York having one of the lowest bullying rates in the country, and Ronny Chieng chimes in on the list of worst first dates according to women.
Clarence Thomas's Unreported Loan & New York Schools See a Decline in Bullying (The Daily Show on YouTube, Oct 27, 2023 - 7:05 min)
...a handwritten note from Thomas on Supreme Court stationery dated December 6, 1999. The documents included a promissory note detailing that the principal balance of the note had an interest rate of 7.5% per year.
In 2004, the loan was extended for 10 years. According to the summary, committee staff reviewed a note from Welters in 2008 that stated that Thomas had been paying him interest only on the vehicle for “many years” and that Welters would no longer seek payment because he believed that Thomas had paid interest greater than the purchase price of the bus.