The Courts (not specific to either party)

[knapplc]

 

 

Gifts from billionaires to Clarence Thomas: At least 38 destination vacations — including a previously unreported Bahamas voyage on a yacht 26 private jet flights, plus another 8 by helicopter A dozen VIP passes to pro and college sporting events Two stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica One standing invitation to an uber-exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic coast https://propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-billionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court

[TGHusker]

1 hour ago, knapplc said:

 

 

Gifts from billionaires to Clarence Thomas: At least 38 destination vacations — including a previously unreported Bahamas voyage on a yacht 26 private jet flights, plus another 8 by helicopter A dozen VIP passes to pro and college sporting events Two stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica One standing invitation to an uber-exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic coast https://propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-billionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court

If there was ever a reason to recall a judge.....     Another reason the Dems need to retain control of the Senate. 

[Archy1221]

Wondering if this is when other posters will ask in this thread “was a crime committed”.  “Where is the proof of a crime” 

[ZRod]

4 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

 

Gifts from billionaires to Clarence Thomas: At least 38 destination vacations — including a previously unreported Bahamas voyage on a yacht 26 private jet flights, plus another 8 by helicopter A dozen VIP passes to pro and college sporting events Two stays at luxury resorts in Florida and Jamaica One standing invitation to an uber-exclusive golf club overlooking the Atlantic coast https://propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-other-billionaires-sokol-huizenga-novelly-supreme-court

Wonder if any of those college passes were to the Husker games he showed up at...

[Lorewarn]

57 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Wondering if this is when other posters will ask in this thread “was a crime committed”.  “Where is the proof of a crime” 

 

 

If it's not illegal then good on Thomas for being a shrewd self-serving sycophant and getting the bag, and shame on him for taking this avenue to do it. 

 

If it's not illegal then it's still at least a big alarm bell exposing the fact that we need to have some very intentional and thought out reforms and rules put in place to protect the court and the country from the court.

[Archy1221]

9 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

 

If it's not illegal then it's still at least a big alarm bell exposing the fact that we need to have some very intentional and thought out reforms and rules put in place to protect the court and the country from the court.

 

12 minutes ago, Lorewarn said:

 

 

If it's not illegal then good on Thomas for being a shrewd self-serving sycophant and getting the bag, and shame on him for taking this avenue to do it. 

 

If it's not illegal then it's still at least a big alarm bell exposing the fact that we need to have some very intentional and thought out reforms and rules put in place to protect the court and the country from the court.

Yet you and others seem to downplay the Biden inquiries into “what’s the crime”  
 

Above, You’ve just described why it’s not all just boiling it down to possible criminal acts.   The law can be murky when it comes down to corruption, but non-criminal corruption doesn’t mean it’s not corrupt behavior.  

[Ulty]

25 minutes ago, Archy1221 said:

Above, You’ve just described why it’s not all just boiling it down to possible criminal acts.   The law can be murky when it comes down to corruption, but non-criminal corruption doesn’t mean it’s not corrupt behavior.  

This is a fair point, what is unethical and slimy is not necessary illegal. But in Clarence Thomas' case, there has been tons of evidence showing unethical/corrupt actions and/or conflict of interest, underscoring the need for clear standards of ethics and conduct for SCOTUS that they have refused to consider. In Joe Biden's case, the evidence has shown jack squat against Joe himself.

[Archy1221]

19 minutes ago, Ulty said:

This is a fair point, what is unethical and slimy is not necessary illegal. But in Clarence Thomas' case, there has been tons of evidence showing unethical/corrupt actions and/or conflict of interest, underscoring the need for clear standards of ethics and conduct for SCOTUS that they have refused to consider. In Joe Biden's case, the evidence has shown jack squat against Joe himself.

I didn’t give that laughy face to you but you are dead wrong when talking about The Big Guy.   If you are expecting to see a billboard with a Joe quote saying “make sure I get my ten percent” you won’t be finding one.  But you have his own sons emails, WhatsApp messages, Archer’s testimony about the brand, money wire transfers, and Joe Biden meetings coinciding with those money deposit/transfer dates.  Testimony from others saying Hunter helped pay certain expenses for Joe (remember where Hunter got his money). 
 

Joe knew what he was doing to enrich family members (the probably non-illegal yet unethical part).  What I don’t think investigators have found yet is the LLC/‘s paying expenses for Joe, which would show direct income ties at that point.  

[Lorewarn]

1 hour ago, Archy1221 said:

 

Yet you and others seem to downplay the Biden inquiries into “what’s the crime”  
 

Above, You’ve just described why it’s not all just boiling it down to possible criminal acts.   The law can be murky when it comes down to corruption, but non-criminal corruption doesn’t mean it’s not corrupt behavior.  

 

 

The reason the conversation around Biden is in regards to crime is because the GOP isn't trying to constantly go after Biden and impeach him on ethical grounds - they're desperately trying to find criminal grounds to do so. That's the lane that his opposition is taking, so that's the lane that is relevant to the conversation.

 

It's in context to Trump - both in regards to the people going after them, and in regard to the people defending them. After years of opposition to Trump based on ethical and moral grounds being met with indifference or even celebration and a lack of acknowledgment on the part of his supporters and party, the opposition turned to criminal grounds.

 

That's why the conversation is framed that way now. I'm sure there's unethical elements to Joe's situation with his son/burisma/ukraine, and I'm sure there's all sorts of unethical compromising and special interest influence throughout his long career. But you, as a two time active Trump supporter and still-current GOP champion, helped usher us into the era where ethical violations mean absolutely jack s#!t and the only card left to play is criminal violations. For the record i'm not in any way whatsoever a Joe Biden fan, I'm just entirely opposed to Trump and the current iteration of the GOP and happier with the more sane, less criminal, less debaucherous alternative.

 

[BigRedBuster]

 

[Archy1221]

1 hour ago, BigRedBuster said:

 

Perfect.  If the national championship is ever in dispute with NU part of the mix and it goes to the Supreme Court we have an ally in the mix now.   Must have been 4D chess by Osborne.  

[Archy1221]

I’m not arguing Jan 6 rioters get more lenient sentences here, but the disparity is quite stunning.  Also consider a DC judge just gave a lighter sentence to man convicted of shooting 11 times and killing another man walking his two kids to school in broad daylight.  
 

 

[suh_fan93]

 

[Scarlet]

[DevoHusker]

13 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

Not doing himself any favors