SCOTUS Justice Thomas “On The Take” from GOP Super-donor

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, who has been on the bench of the nation’s highest court since 1991, has been found, for the past 20 years, to have been receiving gifts worth several millions of dollars from a Texas real estate billionarie, and has failed to report any of them, as required by law.

THIS is an item which, I think, is BIGGER news than the troubles the former, 45th President, finds himself mired in, all of which are messes of his own making. We’ll see how those cakes cook up.

However, with this matter — which I think is a far more serious one for the integrity of our republic — which is the impartiality of equal justice under law — I smell an imminent impeachment of a SCOTUS Justice on the horizon, perhaps even calls to vacate orders in which his vote was a deciding factor. The ties and the links are present which more than lend themselves to the idea that his rulings demonstrated partiality in favor of certain parties with business before the court.

And here’s something directly related, which was published the day BEFORE the ProPublica article (found below) was published: A OpEd on The Hill, headlined “Will the Supreme Court justices comply with new rules on gift disclosure?“

The quick-n-easy answer is “most likely not,” but a more detailed response, which increases ones understanding of the matter, follows. Published 04/05/23 at 8:00 AM ET, author Steven Lubet — the Williams Memorial Professor Emeritus at the Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law and coauthor of “Judicial Conduct and Ethics” (5th edition) and many other books — quoted another legal authority on the matter of Justice Thomas’ deliberate failure to report gifts for 20 years, and wrote in part that when asked to whom the Judicial Conference Committee on Financial Disclosures applies, replied by writing that, “the “Ethics in Government Act is the ultimate source of these reporting requirements,” and that it applies to “all judicial officers” including “the Chief Justice of the United States” [and] the Associate Justices of the Supreme Court.””

However, Chief Justice John Roberts has consistently rejected that idea, i.e., the law, including the authority of the Judicial Conference, by writing in his 2011 Year-End Report on the Federal Judiciary that its “committees have no mandate to prescribe rules or standards” for the Supreme Court. In other words, he wrote that he, and other Supreme Court Justices are above the law, that the law does NOT apply to them.

There are numerous instances in which SCOTUS Justices have flouted the law with regard to gifts, and Justice Clarence Thomas is by no means the only one, though he may be the most egregious example, who also, for a period of 6 consecutive years failed to list his wife “Ginny,” Virginia’s employment on his disclosure forms, and explained it away by claiming that it was “inadvertently omitted due to a misunderstanding of the filing instructions.” For a Supreme Court Justice, a individual well-versed in numerous intricacies of law, to make such a claim is so incredulous, that it borders on preposterous absurdity.

During his last 10 years on the SCOTUS, late Justice Antonin Scalia took over 250 subsidized trips, some of which were related to speeches he made, while others were vacations, and included frequent private jet travel, numerous luxury resorts and lodges stays, many of which he exempted from disclosure under previous, less explicit disclosure and reporting rules. The former Justice Stephen Breyer was similarly a recipient of such largess, and disclosed 185 subsidized trips during the same time period — although both figures may be significantly under-reported.

This problem is directly related to the impartiality that ALL judges, again, as impartial arbiters, are supposed to have, because not only is the lackadaisical attitude toward money and gifts from wealthy donors demonstrative of corruption, so too is the lack of any standard for recusal. The Supreme Court is, quite literally, another example of “the fox watching the hen house,” i.e., that they make up their own rules as they go, all in the name of either autonomy, or self-governance, and essentially think themselves exempt from the law, by refusing to submit to the law’s authority.

There are other observers of the SCOTUS who are also hawks, or watchdogs, on the subject of ethics and accountability on the nation’s highest court, among them, Fix the Court, a website that advocates for reforms to be made to the court to improve integrity and demonstrate unquestionable impartiality, and has a page linking to each Justice’s financial disclosures, for several years back. Sadly, it is painfully obvious, and exceedingly clear that the SCOTUS will not fix their own problems, so external measures must be taken, i.e., laws must be enacted mandating full financial disclosure and compliance, and establishing recusal standards.

This matter, however, is a subset of an even greater national problem, from which both political parties suffer, and that matter is best analogized by acknowledging that football teams don’t get to write their own game play rules, no matter which team is national champion, or not. The Alabama Crimson Tide has not, by virtue of their numerous National Championships, been able to change game rules to suit them, nor has any NFL team ever been able to do so, regardless of how many Super Bowl wins they’ve had, or which team is current champion. So, when politicians select their voters by gerrymandering, they do so in order to give themselves an unfair advantage, and it’s not merely “politics,” per se, it is a matter of corruption, by pretending to be impartial, or just, but instead are openly partisan and denying people of someone who would represent their interests. Politics and law are indeed about being just and impartial, every bit as much as any court should be, including the Supreme Court. Voters are supposed to elect their politicians, not politicians select their voters.

To further aid a direct, grass-roots process, there should be recall and direct petition laws which empower voters to recall politicians who are not representing their constituents’ wishes, as well as establishing a viable legal pathway for citizens to introduce legislation independently of the legislature, when legislators refuse to heed their constituents’ wishes to introduce legislation.

Money in politics is another obviously corrupting influence and power, and the best way to manage it, is to put all donors’ money into one common pot for each office, and divvy it up equally among the candidates, thereby enabling all candidates to campaign on their ability to persuade voters of their ideas, and the value of their candidacy, instead of seeming to purchase the office by the amount of money raised. Such a law which would enable “common pool contributions” AND be equally divided among the candidates for a particular office, would also satisfy the so-called “money is free speech” Supreme Court ruling, and conceivably, could allow more money to be put into the electoral PROCESS, NOT the candidate, i.e., contribution limits could be increased. Conceivably also, because such donations to the PROCESS would be impartial in effect, they could perhaps also be made fully tax deductible.

Ranked Choice Voting would further empower citizen voters to select among numerous candidates for any office, would immediately end costly primary elections paid for by the state, and perhaps even — in conjunction with “common pool contributions” — contribute to a broadening of political parties representing the peoples’ interests, instead of the “either/or” 2-party system which has dominated for so long. Voters should not be forced to choose from a bad or worse candidate.

And when a citizen registers to vote, that individual should immediately, i.e., on-the-spot, be issued a photographic Voter ID. By so doing, it would put to rest the ridiculously asinine and outrageously false claims made primarily by one political party which asserts that voter fraud is rampant. As well, each voter would be issued a number, much like a driver license number, or U.S. passport number, which would then be required to be affixed to, or included with, any absentee, or mail-in ballot, and so done to further reduce any possibility of voter fraud. It would also eliminate the discrimination inherent with, and absurdity of, so-called “exact match” signature laws, because signatures do change over time. As well, by requiring the government to issue a photographic Voter ID -and- a corresponding number, mail-in balloting could be expanded, relatively risk-free, and trouble-free.

Election Day should be made a National Holiday, and employees should get paid for that time off, and Early In-Person Voting should be at least two weeks duration.

To know of SCOTUS Justice Thomas’ corruption is an EXCEEDINGLY stronger, wretch-inducing effluvium — worse even, than the infected, rotting stench of hypocrisy cooking.

Is he a Justice, or is he joke?

He is CORRUPTED!

DEMAND SCOTUS ETHICS NOW!

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-scotus-undisclosed-luxury-travel-gifts-crow

Clarence Thomas Secretly Accepted Luxury Trips From GOP Donor

— ProPublica

April 6, 5 a.m. EDT

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski

ProPublica.org
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power.
Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.

Official Supreme Court group photo — Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, October 2022

Texas billionaire, GOP super-donor, Harlan Crow in October 201

Third image: Video of The Michaela Rose, Crow’s yacht. https://propublica.s3.amazonaws.com/projects/graphics/2023-scotus-private-jets/images/yacht.mp4

Fourth image: Video of a Bombardier Global 5000, the make and model of Crow’s private jet.
https://propublica.s3.amazonaws.com/projects/graphics/2023-scotus-private-jets/images/plane_1.mp4

Fifth image: Video of the boathouse at Topridge, Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks. https://propublica.s3.amazonaws.com/projects/graphics/2023-scotus-private-jets/images/topridge.mp4
Credits: Erin Schaff/The New York Times via AP, Pool; Chris Goodney/Bloomberg via Getty Images; Alec Burke; Air Charter Service; Kyle Griffith

In late June 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef.

Clarence Thomas (tan vest & camera) and his wife, Ginni (in red), front left, with Harlan Crow, back right, and others in Flores, Indonesia, in July 2019. Credit: via Instagram

If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too.

For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show. A public servant who has a salary of $285,000, he has vacationed on Crow’s superyacht around the globe. He flies on Crow’s Bombardier Global 5000 jet. He has gone with Crow to the Bohemian Grove, the exclusive California all-male retreat, and to Crow’s sprawling ranch in East Texas. And Thomas typically spends about a week every summer at Crow’s private resort in the Adirondacks.

The extent and frequency of Crow’s apparent gifts to Thomas have no known precedent in the modern history of the U.S. Supreme Court.

These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights

A Story of American National Interests… as told by a Piece of Bacon

THIS! is honest to goodness COUNTRY BACON !!😋

THIS! is honest-to-goodness COUNTRY BACON!!😋

NONE of that mass-produced, factory-farmed, Made-in-China, Made-for-China gobbledygook.

This does NOT need refrigeration!

And, these pieces are also cooked, of course.

Oh! And you KNOW, that since 2013, Smithfield Foods, in Smithfield, VA, a formerly-American-based company, has been OWNED BY THE COMMUNIST CHINESE “Shuanghui Group” (now known as “WH Group” because it sounds more “American,” you know) because Smithfield’s Wall$teet corporate owners sold their American birthright for a paltry bowl of porridge — a mere US$4.72B.

You DO recall that China is a Communist nation, don’t you?

WH Group’s “global headquarters is strategically located in Hong Kong, with regional headquarters in China and the U.S.,” while the “Headquarters Shuanghui Development in Luohe, Henan Province,” China, and WH Group’s U.S. Headquarters of their Smithfield Foods division is in Smithfield, Virginia.

WH Group is also one of the LARGEST FOREIGN OWNERS of American farmland, with 146,000 acres, and that separate sale (as part of Smithfield’s holdings) was worth US$500M, according to the USDA.

Put another way, 146,000 acres is 228.1252 square miles… that’s nearly 20% (18.79% exactly) of the entire state of

Federal Reserve’s “Beige Book” shows improving economy

The Federal Reserve regularly publishes a summary of economic activity in the 12 Federal Reserve Districts in the United States.

It is important to note that “This document summarizes comments received from businesses and other contacts outside the Federal Reserve and is not a commentary on the views of Federal Reserve officials.”

Much, if not most of the news was promising.

Summary highlights from this Beige Book 2013-01-16 are that:

• “Reports from the twelve Federal Reserve Districts indicated that economic activity has expanded since the previous Beige Book report, with all twelve Districts characterizing the pace of growth as either modest or moderate.”

• “All twelve districts reported some growth in

Banks encourage “short” sales to invigorate economy, public not enthused

Our nation’s economy has for years rested upon manufacturing, which has been the “backbone” of any industrialized nation. (Note the phrase “industrialized nation.”) Now that industry has been “out-sourced” to China, India, and other nations with emerging economies, not only has America become dependent upon other nations (not independent), but our national security and standard of living has been compromised.

Thus, banks, insurance companies and stock brokerage houses – who have again been allowed to enjoy their incestuous fiscal orgies because the Glass-Stegall Act was repealed – are forced to invent artificial commercial paper (derivatives, etc., which no one can thoroughly explain) to increase profits. In conjunction with the computer-driven algorithms of auto-traders and futures markets, the risks Wall Street and banks make (upon the backs of the people) are increasingly becoming a veritable “house of cards” built upon shifting sands.

The uncertainty of our economic future is even more precarious, and is no more clearly demonstrated than in this instance, when banks can’t sell houses they own, even after taking significant reductions (losses), and providing incentives for private buyers.

After reading the following news story, consider the implications for our economy.