10 Apr 23
@vivify saidSomehow we're supposed to hold these three things in our head at the same time:
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.
(1) Thomas' reception of "benefits" (i.e. was invited to vacation with friends) is of such importance it needs to dominate the news cycle and Thomas needs to be held in contempt.
(2) Even though his trips were not secret, everything would be okay if he'd filled out a form before each trip and filed it in a cabinet somewhere.
(3) Had the trips been to places in a person's name instead of a company that person owns, then it would be okay.
Sorry, my brain can't handle all three of those at the same time.
@techsouth saidYou're really bending over backwards to defend this. I don't think the superyacht would be made available if Clarence Thomas was his friend the city bus driver.
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.
...[text shortened]... ds to avoid corruption. If only the ancient Romans had figured this out in time to save the empire.
It's in news because people now are understandably wondering whether Clarence Thomas is selling out his country to benefit his wealthy benefactors.
10 Apr 23
Just a request to keep me honest.
If I ever take the bait and start firing off angry posts about something bad the Democrats did that is so obviously a political hack like this Thomas thing, could someone please save this and remind me.
I'll admit I've fallen for such things in the past, but I aspire to do better and to put actual thought into my opinions rather than just have them assigned to me by political hacks.
I expect that if anyone bothers to remember this they're just as likely to throw this back at me whether the critique is justified or not, but I plan on holding myself to having an actual serious of thoughts rather than just a knee jerk reaction to some thought planted in me by someone else. I may regret writing this, but I'll take that chance just to keep myself honest. We all know that Republicans play these silly games too, and even though I prefer Republicans over Democrats, I don't want to be a part of any hackery.
10 Apr 23
@techsouth saidThey apparently were since ProPublica only uncovered the issue through exhaustive investigation.
Even though his trips were not secret
Does that change your mind at all? No, of course not. You'll just conjure up another dumb excuse to not hold Thomas accountable.
10 Apr 23
@wildgrass saidI don't know many city bus drivers that have friends with yachts or that have had a chance to foster lifelong friendships at Yale.
You're really bending over backwards to defend this. I don't think the superyacht would be made available if Clarence Thomas was his friend the city bus driver.
Is it your opinion that in order to foster a free society that we should outlaw friendships that somehow aren't "equitable" enough?
10 Apr 23
@vivify saidI don't know.
They apparently were since ProPublica only uncovered the issue through exhaustive investigation.
Does that change your mind at all? No, of course not. You'll just conjure up another dumb excuse to not hold Thomas accountable.
Tell me more about this "exhaustive" investigation.
10 Apr 23
@wildgrass saidIf only his friend had kept all his property in his own name rather than forming an LLC, then no one would be wondering these things.
You're really bending over backwards to defend this. I don't think the superyacht would be made available if Clarence Thomas was his friend the city bus driver.
It's in news because people now are understandably wondering whether Clarence Thomas is selling out his country to benefit his wealthy benefactors.
10 Apr 23
@techsouth saidhttps://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-undisclosed-luxury-travel-gifts-crow
I don't know.
Tell me more about this "exhaustive" investigation.
10 Apr 23
@vivify saidYour assertion was that these trips were somehow secret because some group had to do an "exhaustive" investigation.
https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-undisclosed-luxury-travel-gifts-crow
It is clear from the first 10 seconds on this link that this site is highly partisan and it doesn't start out telling me anything about how hard they had to work to uncover all this. And it is not clear how long I have to sit and watch before I learned how dedicated the crack team was that had dig for clues to find out about about these vacations. Did the team of investigators have to involve the FBI to figure out where Thomas went on vacation? Was it something that you or I could have figured out ourselves if we'd decided to pursue it?
For some reason I fear I'm going to watch a long presentation that is nothing more than a dramatized regurgitation of the same old talking points. What would you like to add to what we already know?
Maybe you can just tell why you think they had to undergo an "exhaustive" search.
What do you think? When Thomas went on vacation, is it your belief that the other SC justices didn't know where he was going or with whom he was going?
10 Apr 23
@techsouth saidScroll down for the article.
Your assertion was that these trips were somehow secret because some group had to do an "exhaustive" investigation.
It is clear from the first 10 seconds on this link that this site is highly partisan and it doesn't start out telling me anything about how hard they had to work to uncover all this. And it is not clear how long I have to sit and watch before I learned how ...[text shortened]... it your belief that the other SC justices didn't know where he was going or with whom he was going?
10 Apr 23
@techsouth saidNope. I'm saying the relationships of powerful people like Clarence and Harlan is not friendly in the same way as you and your bungalow-owning buddy who rents it for $500. Maybe it's all on the level, but any red blooded taxpayer should be skeptical of a relationship between a supposedly impartial judge with his kind of power and a political hack like Harlan.
I don't know many city bus drivers that have friends with yachts or that have had a chance to foster lifelong friendships at Yale.
Is it your opinion that in order to foster a free society that we should outlaw friendships that somehow aren't "equitable" enough?
10 Apr 23
@wildgrass saidWhat is the actionable part of "should be skeptical"?
Nope. I'm saying the relationships of powerful people like Clarence and Harlan is not friendly in the same way as you and your bungalow-owning buddy who rents it for $500. Maybe it's all on the level, but any red blooded taxpayer should be skeptical of a relationship between a supposedly impartial judge with his kind of power and a political hack like Harlan.
From where I'm sitting, I would guess that Thomas has legitimate friends that are wealthy and also would be approached by different wealthy people who are NOT friends that may want to influence him.
If he and his wife vacation with someone wealthy, I can choose to be skeptical or not, but I don't see what is going to be actionable on my skepticism. The same rules will apply in both cases, but the rules that are made need to allow for the former.
FWIW: My buddy doesn't rent his house out. $500 per night is just a rough guess based on my having looked on VRBO at other property (which I haven't rented at that price). Not that this matters. Since my friend's house has come up a few times, I just wanted to clarify that.
@techsouth saidIf it is disclosed like it should then this is where recusal systems will apply. If he's actual friends with a multimillion dollar contributor to one particular political party, and then a case like citizens united comes across his desk, he should recuse himself for a conflict of interest.
What is the actionable part of "should be skeptical"?
From where I'm sitting, I would guess that Thomas has legitimate friends that are wealthy and also would be approached by different wealthy people who are NOT friends that may want to influence him.
If he and his wife vacation with someone wealthy, I can choose to be skeptical or not, but I don't see what is going ...[text shortened]... that this matters. Since my friend's house has come up a few times, I just wanted to clarify that.
That's what's actionable.
10 Apr 23
@wildgrass saidgeorge soros's son has visited the whitehouse 14 times since biden was installed...are you for or against?
If it is disclosed like it should then this is where recusal systems will apply. If he's actual friends with a multimillion dollar contributor to one particular political party, and then a case like citizens united comes across his desk, he should recuse himself for a conflict of interest.
That's what's actionable.