Even more US corruption…

@techsouth said
Apparently you missed my most recent post.

I am agreeing with you now. I had been thinking that this was just another case of knee jerk reaction where people just get angry because someone assigned them an opinion.

But I overlooked the fact that this property was owned through a COMPANY.

The article said that personal hospitality was okay, but Thomas' frien ...[text shortened]... Christmas just to kind of balance things out. After all, that's just how normal friends see money.

Again: this was a business. A rich Republican donor taking Thomas to his property to give gifts is unethical for obvious reasons.

Furthermore this is only one of several examples of questionable gifts given to Thomas listed in the article.

@vivify said
It was a resort, not a house. It was a business.

If only the ancient Romans had figured out the importance of this distinction, maybe the Roman Empire would have lasted another 500 years.

Judges can be corrupted by staying in buildings that have beds and furniture, but only (and this is the important part) if those buildings are owned by people who incorporate.

Thankfully all other members of congress are being careful to ensure that all personal hospitality they accept does not utilize any assets with indirect ownership through LLCs. As long as we can guarantee hosts who provide hospitality to politicians limit themselves to use assets with direct ownership, we can be sure our politicians will be unbiased.

@techsouth said
If only the ancient Romans had figured out the importance of this distinction, maybe the Roman Empire would have lasted another 500 years.

Judges can be corrupted by staying in buildings that have beds and furniture, but only (and this is the important part) if those buildings are owned by people who incorporate.

Thankfully all other members of congress are being ca ...[text shortened]... mit themselves to use assets with direct ownership, we can be sure our politicians will be unbiased.

Dude you are really terrible at sarcasm.

Again: if Thomas is too stupid to understand the laws he's supposed to follow as a Justice should he even be on the Supreme Court?

@vivify said
Again: this was a business. A rich Republican donor taking Thomas to his property to give gifts is unethical for obvious reasons.

Furthermore this is only one of several examples of questionable gifts given to Thomas listed in the article.

Do you think the "trigger" words carry legal significance.

Here is what I am hearing: "A friend invited Thomas to join him on a family get-away".

@vivify said
Dude you are really terrible at sarcasm.

Again: if Thomas is too stupid to understand the laws he's supposed to follow as a Justice should he even be on the Supreme Court?

We come full circle. You missed the part where I agreed.

Quote:
I missed this part "Crow’s resort is owned through a company, meaning Thomas could have still been required to document his stays there." That totally changes everything. I mean, I thought that perhaps Thomas had just been confused. But REALLY!!! This resort is owned through a COMPANY!!!! It couldn't be more obvious now. I think we can safely rule out any innocent possibility. It is no longer even possible to believe that Thomas was uncertain about the rules.

Obviously if Thomas did not figure out that because his friend's property was owned through an LLC instead of in his own name that reporting would be required he's got some serious trouble. He should have at they very least looked around at how well all the other politicians report personal hospitality.

I even overheard a WalMart greeter discussing with the WalMart janitor the very same thing. They were like "Yeah, if it had been in his friend's name, sure, we wouldn't be concerned. And yeah, had he filed a report, certainly there'd be no complaint. But look, the property was owned by his friend through an LLC AND Thomas didn't fill out the obligatory form. How awful is that!!!"

If 80 million other Americans can see how obvious this is, Thomas has no excuse.

@techsouth said
Do you think the "trigger" words carry legal significance.

Here is what I am hearing: "A friend invited Thomas to join him on a family get-away".

How many friends offer you yacht holidays every year for 20 years… and more…

Pull the other one.

@techsouth said
Here is what I am hearing: "A friend invited Thomas to join him on a family get-away".

A "friend" who gave Thomas a gift worth $19,000, and gave him a check for $5,000, also as a gift:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-dec-31-na-gifts31-story.html

@techsouth said
Apparently you missed my most recent post.

I am agreeing with you now. I had been thinking that this was just another case of knee jerk reaction where people just get angry because someone assigned them an opinion.

But I overlooked the fact that this property was owned through a COMPANY.

The article said that personal hospitality was okay, but Thomas' frien ...[text shortened]... Christmas just to kind of balance things out. After all, that's just how normal friends see money.

Interesting that you repeatedly revert to using analogies of items that are orders of magnitude cheaper than what Clarence got, instead of just using the actual items he got. Hundreds of thousands worth. Unreported.

Like well sure does the barber shop owner expect me to tip him just because I took one from that bowl of lollipops on the counter?

What if he 'gifts' you the entire barbershop?

@vivify said
A "friend" who gave Thomas a gift worth $19,000, and gave him a check for $5,000, also as a gift:

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2004-dec-31-na-gifts31-story.html

I am having trouble keeping up.

First, the problem was staying at a vacation resort with family friends. The problem was that it was "unreported".

Now we're talking about gifts that were reported.

Can you just admit you don't like Thomas and will accept any flimsy argument against him?

@wildgrass said
Interesting that you repeatedly revert to using analogies of items that are orders of magnitude cheaper than what Clarence got, instead of just using the actual items he got. Hundreds of thousands worth. Unreported.

Like well sure does the barber shop owner expect me to tip him just because I took one from that bowl of lollipops on the counter?

What if he 'gifts' you the entire barbershop?

"Unreported"?

If it was unreported, how do you know about it?

Are you talking about the many gifts that WERE reported? Or are you talking about the vacations with close friends that somehow we still all know about, yet we're still mad because there is not a form in some file cabinet logging the trip?

I have stayed with friends in beach houses that would have cost $500 per night to rent on the open market (but I was staying with the owner as a guest). Only a dishonest enemy would try to make that a crime by claiming it's a $500 gift.

@shavixmir said
How many friends offer you yacht holidays every year for 20 years… and more…

Pull the other one.

I've been to the same friend's beach house more than once per year going on 10 years.

If this were a bribe, I'd think they'd add some variety, don't you?

Sounds like a closer personal friend to me.

@techsouth said
I am having trouble keeping up.

First, the problem was staying at a vacation resort with family friends. The problem was that it was "unreported".

Now we're talking about gifts that were reported.

Can you just admit you don't like Thomas and will accept any flimsy argument against him?

Thomas received two decades worth of gifts like that which have NOT been reported. You've already been told this is the problem. Clearly you don't care because you're a partisan shmuck.

@techsouth said
"Unreported"?

If it was unreported, how do you know about it?

Are you talking about the many gifts that WERE reported? Or are you talking about the vacations with close friends that somehow we still all know about, yet we're still mad because there is not a form in some file cabinet logging the trip?

I have stayed with friends in beach houses that would have cost ...[text shortened]... er as a guest). Only a dishonest enemy would try to make that a crime by claiming it's a $500 gift.

I know because of Clarence Thomas' statement on the subject.

Again, why talk about your friends beachouse and not your friends superyacht? Harlan's yacht burns more than that in fuel per hour, not to mention all the employees navigating and serving food.

Harlan is a GOP megadonor who directly benefitted from the citizens united decision on which Clarence was the deciding vote. At the same time, Harlan was offering lavish vacations to Clarence that were waaaaaaay more valuable than your friends 1 bed bungalow.

@techsouth said
I've been to the same friend's beach house more than once per year going on 10 years.

If this were a bribe, I'd think they'd add some variety, don't you?

Sounds like a closer personal friend to me.

Not necessarily a bribe, but depends. Were you simultaneously working on a legal case that would directly impact your friends business, you need to report it for possible ethics violations.

@wildgrass said
Not necessarily a bribe, but depends. Were you simultaneously working on a legal case that would directly impact your friends business, you need to report it for possible ethics violations.

Indeed. Although it seems many knew about these frequent trips and didn't say anything for 20 years, the only problem is that there is not a piece of paper in a file cabinet.

And we have established that this only matters if his friend created an LLC to "own" the property.

Clearly there would be no ethics concern if his friend had just kept assets in his own name.

In summary, Thomas can openly take a trip with a family friend if one of the following are true:

(1) The friend only uses property in his own name and does not involve assets he owns through an LLC -or-
(2) There is a form filled out and put in a file cabinet.

Either way, the trip would not have been in secret, because somehow we all know about these trips today even though they happened many years ago.

Again, I marvel at how skilled we are as Americans to have created the perfect set of ethics standards to avoid corruption. If only the ancient Romans had figured this out in time to save the empire.