Welcome to PatsFans.com

More Public Corruption...Clarence Thomas fails to report $686K of wife's income..

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by DarrylS, Jan 23, 2011.

  1. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +176 / 5 / -22

    An oversight, maybe.. but in probability more of just f..ing with the constitution. Seems somewhat arrogant that he failed to report, or maybe he just forgot. OTOH 686K of income if tought to forget over a 5 year period of time.. or maybe it is just "chump change" to the elite of the right.

    Judges have to fill out financial disclosure forms to indicate that they have no 'conflict of interest' problems with their spouses' incomes. This is done yearly listing any incomes their spouses might have, any gifts they themselves might have been given, any income they themselves might have earned from anything outside their job as judge. Thomas's wife earned an income from an outside political group, and judge thomas could be tempted to rule in her favor or in the favor of her political group if a case came before him because he would be influenced by the money paid to her.

    It could be argued that her political party purchased his vote by giving money to her. In order to avoid an appearance of impropriety (the standard for conflict of interest), judges are asked to be honest and to admit when they or their spouses have financial ties to any organizati*on that might be involved or influentia*l in a court case. Judge Thomas simply decided that because he is a judge he does not have to follow the rules.

    This could be impeachable, but as the Congress is so broken it will never happen..


    Group says Thomas failed to report income - UPI.com


    The Constitutional Reference..

    Article III | LII / Legal Information Institute

    This is not very good behavior, and he should recuse himself from many of the decisions coming down the pipe as he has an obvious conflict..

    Oops.. forgot the constitution is situationally applied and there is nothing to see here folks.. just move on. Thomas, despite an obvioius appearance of impropriety, will just keep on keeping on.
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2011
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,069
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

    ...Racism...
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2011
  3. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +176 / 5 / -22

    That was the card he played during the nomination hearings...
  4. Nikolai

    Nikolai Football Atheist PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,793
    Likes Received:
    176
    Ratings:
    +347 / 0 / -1

    #54 Jersey

    I think you might be serious here.

    Then again, you're probably right. The left would never dare to collect large salaries or have large amounts of money either.

    [​IMG]

    Back to the point, politicians robbing Americans isn't all that new. I wish it would have raised an eyebrow.
  5. cupofjoe1962

    cupofjoe1962 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    2,557
    Likes Received:
    18
    Ratings:
    +33 / 12 / -2

    Wow.... This is the type of behavior that will get you a cabinet nomination in the Obama administration.
  6. IcyPatriot

    IcyPatriot ------------- PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    37,950
    Likes Received:
    276
    Ratings:
    +550 / 4 / -12

    #87 Jersey

    I hope this story does not create more political hate ... :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
  7. patsfan13

    patsfan13 Hall of Fame Poster PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2005
    Messages:
    24,621
    Likes Received:
    66
    Ratings:
    +123 / 7 / -13

    If she were a dem she simply wouldn't have paid taxes on the income.


    It is a real shock she worked for Heritage after all she had only published there for the past 15 years or so....
  8. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +176 / 5 / -22


    So in your world it is ok for a Supreme Court Justice to be tainted.. mondo bizarro continues.

    Without regard her income was not reported.. can that be justified??

    Always thought that the SCOTUS was held to the highest standard?? Maybe not any longer, the highest bidder will now win. Sorry future for this country.
  9. Nikolai

    Nikolai Football Atheist PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    5,793
    Likes Received:
    176
    Ratings:
    +347 / 0 / -1

    #54 Jersey

    That stopped with the advent of activist judges.

    What's that old joke: Where is the only place in the US that the Constitution doesn't mean jack squat?

    The Supreme Court
  10. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +176 / 5 / -22

    Sometimes I think that I am the last remaining idealist, shudder to think what all of this will look like 20 years from now.. from an institution that was revered, will now revert to just another bastion of sectarian politics and ethics violations are considered not to be important..

    The constitution intended the Supreme Court to be neutral in their upholding of our great document, but guess the right can just "settle" and situationallly apply it to fit their agenda.. even ethics violations do not seem to bother them.. guess BJ's are so much more important.. one thing for sure right wing circle jerks are paramount.

    This country is turning into a f..ing cesspool.. when there are no standards for the SCOTUS.. then we need to seriously look at this country and whether or not it will be bound by the constitution.
  11. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: This statement is so laughable because everyone in this forum - including you - knows if it were a libbie you'd be gladly turning a blind eye! :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

    Even if it is true, this is much ado about nothing. They're not saying he evaded taxes or failed to report the income on his 1040, they're saying he failed to disclose it on the proper forms. Why this is much ado about nothing is because we're not talking about secret, covert or under-the-table payments. Plus I hardly think any of those payments influenced any of his decisions.

    Unless you think Clarence Thomas would have been basing his judgements in favor of liberal platforms, then there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest the payments influenced him.
    Last edited: Jan 23, 2011
  12. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Funny I always thought the POTUS was held to the highest standard. But that notion flew out the window in the late 90's.
  13. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +176 / 5 / -22

    Actually you missed it, it flew out when that clown from California took office in the 80's... illegal amnesty, Iran Contra Fiasco, largest tax increase of all time and negotiating with the Iranians before he was elected so that there could be great drama after his coronation.
  14. DarrylS

    DarrylS PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    40,971
    Likes Received:
    99
    Ratings:
    +176 / 5 / -22

    Thanks for stalking, my boots are by the door is you need a lick..

    You do not need evidence, it is about an appearance of impropriety.. the accepted standard for the judiciary.. as much as you want to turn it into a "libbie" vs. "pubbie" issue, it is not.. it is a violation of the public trust for the highest law of the land.

    Let me try once again for the immature, academically challenged.. from the judicial code of conduct..

    Document Viewer

    Another article..

    A deep bench of substitute justices goes unused

    So lets try to operationalize this to show you how it works..

    Elena Kagan recused herself from the case where the Chamber of Commerce is challenging an Arizona immigration law. While Solicitor General Kagan met with outside lawyers to discuss this. So, even though the government filed this brief after she left that office, she's recused herself. Kagan has recused herself from 25 Supreme Court Decisions to avoid an appearance of impropriety.

    Chief Justice John Roberts had to recuse himself from a major Guantanamo detainee case, because he participated in the same case as a lower court judge.

    Clarence Thomas did not recuse himself from a recent case involving Monsanto, for whom he worked for prior to becoming a Supreme Court Justice...

    The point is that Thomas failed to report $686K income from his wife's activities, chump change to many of the rightie elitists, from the Heritage Foundation. If you need to know what the Heritage Foundation is all about let me know, or just giggle and reply with silly emoticons..
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2011
  15. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Hmmm. A single Supreme Court Justice gleans the better part of a million dollars from a political think-tank, with a pronounced conservative stripe... and then "decides" on a party-line, conservative basis... that is just really interesting.

    Oh I know, he's not getting the money, his wife is. Really? So if I'm a petty-ante judge out in the sticks, and my wife pulls down a million bucks working for ohhhhh let's say Exxon, and there's a case before me about Exxon getting drilling lights in my jurisdiction... I wouldn't have to recuse myself?

    Yes, there would be an open and shut criminal conduct charge if this were tax evasion. For conflict of interest, however, this stinks beyond the criminal charge.

    But we know how it works: You impeach guys who get a BJ. You rally around guys who sell the constitution to the highest bidder, in the name of patriotism, or in the name of civility, or in the name of whatever passes for "don't fight, mommy and daddy, don't fight!" at any particular moment.

    Welp, the story is dated 1/22. Let's see how it develops, or doesn't.

    PFnV
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2011
  16. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    39,069
    Likes Received:
    124
    Ratings:
    +332 / 1 / -9

  17. PatsFanInVa

    PatsFanInVa PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    20,099
    Likes Received:
    215
    Ratings:
    +325 / 6 / -8

    Harry, why did you post a link w/no relation to the subject of the thread?

    Mods - is this hijacking or not?
  18. The Brandon Five

    The Brandon Five Rookie

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2010
    Messages:
    6,288
    Likes Received:
    44
    Ratings:
    +104 / 0 / -3

    #75 Jersey

    And how many Heritage Foundation cases came before the SC since Thomas joined?
  19. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Uh, once again in English please. :confused:
    Sorry, but you're the one who made is a "libbie" vs. "pubbie" issue. Everyone in this forum knows you wouldn't give a crap about this issue if it was Sotomayor.
    Your statement here is misleading. Either deliberately so (in which case you're trying to deflect from the truth and fool people into believing a falsehood) or accidentally so (in which case you're just not intelligent enough to understand the facts).

    So which is it? Are you lying to everyone or are you just stupid?
  20. Wolfpack

    Wolfpack Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2009
    Messages:
    9,111
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Ya, PF. You're right. Clarence Thomas would be a flaming liberal on the court if it wasn't for the Heritage Foundation payments to his wife. :rolleyes:
    Are you talking about the guy who committed a felony?

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>