America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 3 months ago by ZRX1200. 72 replies replies.
2 Pages<12
Clarence Thomas needs to resign...
Stogie1020 Offline
#51 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 3,503
Maybe I missed something, but I am not seeing any financial gain here. Did I miss that? Because absent that, we already ask justices to set aside their OWN personal convictions on issues, so where do we draw the line? a Judge's best buddy from college who he plays softball with on the weekends has a Tobacco lobbying job therefore the Justice CANNOT hear cases involving that industry? His kid attends a private christian school, so he cannot hear any cases involving matters of education or religion?

Look, if Justice Thomas himself was actively involved in any efforts outside the court to direct the outcome of the 2020 election, he absolutely should recuse and likely resign. His wife, though, is a stretch IMO.
Speyside2 Offline
#52 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,067
I agree that he should have done that. I see no legal penalty for him not doing so. I think you have thoroughly addressed the illegality of what he did not do. I see no available legal redress for the situation. Maybe he could be disbarred, but how could that change anything?
frankj1 Offline
#53 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,402
Stogie1020 wrote:
Maybe I missed something, but I am not seeing any financial gain here. Did I miss that? Because absent that, we already ask justices to set aside their OWN personal convictions on issues, so where do we draw the line? a Judge's best buddy from college who he plays softball with on the weekends has a Tobacco lobbying job therefore the Justice CANNOT hear cases involving that industry? His kid attends a private christian school, so he cannot hear any cases involving matters of education or religion?

Look, if Justice Thomas himself was actively involved in any efforts outside the court to direct the outcome of the 2020 election, he absolutely should recuse and likely resign. His wife, though, is a stretch IMO.

as always, you ask good questions and make good points, but I may see a serious degree of difference in your examples and what we have here, if I may...

on the tobacco example, you are correct...but to me the degree of difference that might make it a better comparison is if his best buddy was involved with helping the tobacco company hide or change info showing cancer links.

Recusal would seem logical if not demanded.

as for private religious school cases, I'd agree up to the point of the school(s) being his or his kids' schools involved in a case, or if the school(s) involved were under the same "Corporate" Church control (I didn't know what to call the quasi business structure or if Archdiocese is too broad).

His wife didn't ring doorbells and hand out leaflets. She was in direct and strong contact with one of the POTUS' top guns and more. She may not be on trial but she might be like the buddy helping hide cancer research...?

Does that make any difference to you?

rfenst Offline
#54 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,989
28 U.S. Code § 455 - Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:

(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;


(5) He or his spouse...
...

(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
frankj1 Offline
#55 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,402
seems clear ^^^
frankj1 Offline
#56 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,402
"In January, the Supreme Court rejected former President Donald Trump's bid to block the release of some presidential records to the House select committee investigating the January 6 Capitol riot.

Only one of the nine justices dissented: Clarence Thomas.

At the time, Thomas provided no explanation for why he would have approved Trump's request — a standard omission when the top court addresses emergency motions."

Business Insider



the onliest judge?
Sunoverbeach Offline
#57 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 12,557
I have as much authority as the Pope, i just don't have as many people who believe it.
Stogie1020 Offline
#58 Posted:
Joined: 12-19-2019
Posts: 3,503
frankj1 wrote:
as always, you ask good questions and make good points, but I may see a serious degree of difference in your examples and what we have here, if I may...

on the tobacco example, you are correct...but to me the degree of difference that might make it a better comparison is if his best buddy was involved with helping the tobacco company hide or change info showing cancer links.

Recusal would seem logical if not demanded.

as for private religious school cases, I'd agree up to the point of the school(s) being his or his kids' schools involved in a case, or if the school(s) involved were under the same "Corporate" Church control (I didn't know what to call the quasi business structure or if Archdiocese is too broad).

His wife didn't ring doorbells and hand out leaflets. She was in direct and strong contact with one of the POTUS' top guns and more. She may not be on trial but she might be like the buddy helping hide cancer research...?

Does that make any difference to you?



I see your distinctions and understand the nuanced differences you are pointing out. Hypotheticals suck because they never actually match the current circumstance adequatly. I think they all fall within the realm of involvement/culpability/knowledge on the part of the Justice. If someone shows me text messages or emails between Justice Thomas and his wife (or some third party) where Thomas is encouraging, participating, approving or having some level of involvement, then damn the torpedos he needs to go. Being married to someone with differing views, even subversive ones if you like to categorize them that way) doesn't mean that Thomas himself believes or is influenced by those same ideas. As a matter of fact, he may abhor her viewpoint/ideas, but the sex is so good he sticks around anyway.

My point being, I think there are (at least) three levels on the scale:
1. Possibility of impropriety
2. Appearance of impropriety
3. Evidence of impropriety

In my oppinion, we are at level one. If someone shines light on info that advances my perception to level 2 or three, I think this dog may hunt, but barring that, I recoil at the notion of passing judgement based on innuendo, association or supposition. Show me the email/text where Ginny flat out tells Sydney Powel that she "has the full backing of her Big Guy..."

rfenst Offline
#59 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,989
Stogie1020 wrote:
My point being, I think there are (at least) three levels on the scale:
1. Possibility of impropriety
2. Appearance of impropriety
3. Evidence of impropriety


To put it most succinctly, the "mere appearance of impropriety" is in and of itself sufficient for recusal at any level, especially SCOTUS- where it is relatively simple and common for Justices to recuse themselves.

The thing here is that... if he knew about his wife when making any election decisions, given what we know about her now, he should have absolutely recused himself.
Dg west deptford Offline
#60 Posted:
Joined: 05-25-2019
Posts: 2,834
Turns out the more you know about the Honorable Clarence Thomas the more honorable he becomes!

Fascinating man!

I guess I'm biased, because I'd have a cigar with him anytime!
frankj1 Offline
#61 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,402
could very well be a great guy, not seeing claims against that as part of the question discussed about recusal.
Great guys sometimes get in situations requiring uncomfortable decisions for the greater good.

I am seeing unfounded charges of racism, again without evidence (to paraphrase Rudy).
ZRX1200 Online
#62 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,755
No you’re not…..you’re sounding racist.

This is 2022 bitches.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#63 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 12,557
How did I escape Iraq? Iran.
ZRX1200 Online
#64 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,755
I was betting you jive talked your way to Turkey.
Sunoverbeach Offline
#65 Posted:
Joined: 08-11-2017
Posts: 12,557
Couldn't stop to talk. I was in a Russia
ZRX1200 Online
#66 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,755
Ya Zniyou
frankj1 Offline
#67 Posted:
Joined: 02-08-2007
Posts: 42,402
Jamie!
you are on fire!!!
HA!
RayR Offline
#68 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 6,211
I was thinking about this yesterday ...What would RBG do? Think You know, the late sainted leftist Supreme Court judge that trash talked the U.S. Constitution because it was old and it didn't use that word "democracy" even once and it's not WOKE. She said nobody should emulate it because there are newer constitutions like that one in S. Africa that uses nice modern lefty buzz words like "democratic values" and "social justice".

Surely she recused herself from cases that involved even a hint of impropriety? Ya right!

Liberals Want Clarence Thomas To Recuse Himself. Here’s What RBG Did When Her Relatives Got Political

LAUREL DUGGAN
SOCIAL ISSUES AND CULTURE REPORTER
March 31, 2022

Quote:
* Democratic lawmakers are urging Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from certain cases because of his wife’s political activism.

* “Justice Thomas is being held to a newly-invented standard that has no place in the law or in precedent,” Mark Paoletta, an attorney who worked on the confirmations of Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

* Former Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not recuse herself from cases her relatives had publicly commented on or to which her relatives were connected.

Congressional Democrats have urged Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from certain cases due to his wife’s political activism, raising questions about the political activities of other justices’ family members including those of former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Thomas’s wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, reportedly sent text messages to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in the days after the 2020 election which said “do not concede” and claimed Democrats were attempting a “heist” of the presidential election, according to a March 24 report by The Washington Post.

Congressional Democrats have urged Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to recuse himself from certain cases due to his wife’s political activism, raising questions about the political activities of other justices’ family members including those of former Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Thomas’s wife, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, reportedly sent text messages to former White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows in the days after the 2020 election which said “do not concede” and claimed Democrats were attempting a “heist” of the presidential election, according to a March 24 report by The Washington Post.

Clarence Thomas needs to be impeached https://t.co/ZuZbxkMaYs

— Ilhan Omar (@IlhanMN) March 25, 2022

Massachusetts Democratic Sen. Elizabeth Warren and Washington Democratic Rep. Pramila Jayapal sent a letter to the Supreme Court Monday requesting Justice Thomas recuse himself from all future cases involving Jan. 6 or efforts to overturn the 2020 election due to the text messages, according to The Washington Post, while Minnesota Democratic Rep. Ilhan Omar called for Thomas to be impeached.

“Justice Thomas is being held to a newly-invented standard that has no place in the law or in precedent,” Mark Paoletta, an attorney who worked on the confirmations of Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh, told the Daily Caller News Foundation.

The late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg did not recuse herself from cases the court considered regarding parties represented by the law firm at which her husband Martin worked. Martin Ginsburg served as counsel for Fried, Frank, Harris, Shriver & Jacobson, a law firm which brought cases before the Supreme Court including Lonnell Brewer v. Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (RELATED: ‘They Better Speak Out’: Sen. Amy Klobuchar Rips Supreme Court’s Silence On New Ginni Thomas Reports)

More...

https://dailycaller.com/2022/03/31/clarence-ginni-thomas-recusal-ruth-bader-ginsburg/
Speyside2 Offline
#69 Posted:
Joined: 11-11-2021
Posts: 2,067
Comparing conspiracy to overturn a legal victory of the presidency to cases of law is a non starter. As I have previously said this is an unprecedented event. It is to bad you can not comprehend this.
RayR Offline
#70 Posted:
Joined: 07-20-2020
Posts: 6,211
Speyside2 wrote:
Comparing conspiracy to overturn a legal victory of the presidency to cases of law is a non starter. As I have previously said this is an unprecedented event. It is to bad you can not comprehend this.


Conspiracy! Conspiracy! Just having a suspicion or even knowing someone that has a suspicion that something is crooked with duhmacracy is a conspiracy to overthrow the regime they say. Thought Crimes! Welcome to 1984.
rfenst Offline
#71 Posted:
Joined: 06-23-2007
Posts: 36,989
RayR wrote:
I was thinking about this yesterday ...What would RBG do? Think You know, the late sainted leftist Supreme Court judge that trash talked the U.S. Constitution because it was old and it didn't use that word "democracy" even once and it's not WOKE. She said nobody should emulate it because there are newer constitutions like that one in S. Africa that uses nice modern lefty buzz words like "democratic values" and "social justice".

Surely she recused herself from cases that involved even a hint of impropriety? Ya right!

Liberals Want Clarence Thomas To Recuse Himself. Here’s What RBG Did When Her Relatives Got Political

LAUREL DUGGAN
SOCIAL ISSUES AND CULTURE REPORTER
March 31, 2022


So what if Ginsburg was 100% wrong. Too late.
Doesn't get Thomas off the hook.
ZRX1200 Online
#72 Posted:
Joined: 07-08-2007
Posts: 57,755
Now you speak I’ll of the dead goddess?!!!

I’ll pray for you.
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages<12