Justice Clarence Thomas intends to amend his financial disclosure forms to reflect a 2014 real estate deal he made with a GOP megadonor – an acknowledgment that the transaction should have been disclosed almost a decade ago, a source close to Thomas tells CNN.

 

The deal between Thomas and Harlan Crow, a Dallas real estate magnate and long-time friend of Thomas, involves the sale of three Georgia properties, including the home where Thomas’ mother, Leola Williams, 94, currently lives.

 

READ MORE

https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/17/politics/clarence-thomas-amend-disclosure-gop-megadonor/index.html

 

A concession???that dude is compermised big time he should resign or be impeached (that won’t happen under( McCarty/mtg) house to weak and immoral sad ???? 

The Supreme Court judge who doesn't know laws... ????

 

I know, It's often said that shoemakers children are the worst shod.

Sensationalism at its finest and the art of conflating the facts to appear as truth. This is an ethical issue, not a legal issue. But as usual the crazy dems scream hop and holler in hysterics over minor things of the right and do nothing say nothing report nothing about their own filthy corruption. 

1 hour ago, novacova said:

Sensationalism at its finest and the art of conflating the facts to appear as truth. This is an ethical issue, not a legal issue. But as usual the crazy dems scream hop and holler in hysterics over minor things of the right and do nothing say nothing report nothing about their own filthy corruption. 

So you have no problem with justice Clarence Thomas, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, telling lies and being unethical in his financial affairs.

 

Doesn't reflect well, and I hope he gets called out big time (or should I say, bigly) but then again the GOP are a spineless bunch of crooks so will probably protect their own, or maybe MTG can issue a statement in his defence – – yeah right!

 

PS. It could well become a legal issue if he is found guilty of defrauding the IRD with regards to tax being paid. 
 

2 hours ago, novacova said:

Sensationalism at its finest and the art of conflating the facts to appear as truth. This is an ethical issue, not a legal issue. But as usual the crazy dems scream hop and holler in hysterics over minor things of the right and do nothing say nothing report nothing about their own filthy corruption. 

Ethical malfeasance in the supreme court is not a huge problem for you?

8 minutes ago, xylophone said:

Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, telling lies and being unethical in his financial affairs.

Not lies, facts conflated by the opposition. Bad reporting and the opposition sucks it up to fit their narrative. 

 

12 minutes ago, xylophone said:

GOP are a spineless bunch of crooks so will probably protect their own

555! Thanks for validating my point 555! 
 

Articles like this are limited and are designed to incite indifference and limited knowledge.

12 minutes ago, ozimoron said:

Ethical malfeasance in the supreme court is not a huge problem for you?

Already answered. 
Instead of just believing what makes one self feel comfortable, try being an independent empirical thinker and do a little objective research, if it’s even possible 

On 4/17/2023 at 5:02 AM, onthedarkside said:

Justice Clarence Thomas intends to amend his financial disclosure forms to reflect a 2014 real estate deal he made with a GOP megadonor – an acknowledgment that the transaction should have been disclosed almost a decade ago, a source close to Thomas tells CNN.

So all is well then.

And the GOP likes to say the Dems are soft on crime.

 

 

46 minutes ago, novacova said:

Already answered. 
Instead of just believing what makes one self feel comfortable, try being an independent empirical thinker and do a little objective research, if it’s even possible 

I did as you suggested. Thomas has taken millions and never disclosed them while siding with Crow 100% of the time. Is that the empirical thinking you had in mind? If not what numbers are you thinking? You do know what empirical means don't you because it doesn't seem that way from the context of your post?

3 hours ago, novacova said:

Sensationalism at its finest and the art of conflating the facts to appear as truth. This is an ethical issue, not a legal issue. But as usual the crazy dems scream hop and holler in hysterics over minor things of the right and do nothing say nothing report nothing about their own filthy corruption. 

Sensationalism? Really? We are talking about a supreme court judge who has for the last two decades taken free, donated private jet set luxury vacations. Island hopping is superyachts, violating laws that require you to disclose most gifts. All from one billionaire Republican megadonor Harlan Crow.

 

But that's not all. The same megadoner bought properties from Clarence, not only bought them, renovated one of them where Clarences mother now lives rent free. 

 

If that's not got you facing reality yet then perhaps the fact that Clarence has also been over the last two decades, reportedly failing to accurately report hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of income from a family holding company and claimed rents from a company that no longer exists.

 

You claim this is "minor things"?

 

 

.

1 minute ago, placeholder said:

GOP megadonor Harlan Crow isn't charging Clarence Thomas' mother rent. Zillow estimates suggest that would have saved her $155,000 since 2014.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/gop-megadonor-harlan-crow-isnt-charging-clarence-thomas-mother-rent-zillow-estimates-suggest-that-would-have-saved-her-dollar155000-since-2014/ar-AA19Ybo9

OP on it here: https://aseannow.com/topic/1292493-gop-megadonor-harlan-crow-isnt-charging-clarence-thomas-mother-rent-zillow-estimates-suggest-that-would-have-saved-her-155000-since-2014

 

On 4/19/2023 at 11:58 AM, novacova said:

Already answered. 
Instead of just believing what makes one self feel comfortable, try being an independent empirical thinker and do a little objective research, if it’s even possible 

I feel sorry for you as you seem unable to understand that what Clarence Thomas has done is totally unethical and compromises his position; but then again you might just be a MAGA nut, a shill, or someone who just doesn't understand the simple aspects of ethics.

18 hours ago, xylophone said:

I feel sorry for you as you seem unable to understand that what Clarence Thomas has done is totally unethical and compromises his position; but then again you might just be a MAGA nut, a shill, or someone who just doesn't understand the simple aspects of ethics.

Typical statement of an individual that immerses themselves in the blaring media. I don’t feel sorry for such fool that are unable to educate themselves and think for themselves. ????????????

1 hour ago, novacova said:

Typical statement of an individual that immerses themselves in the blaring media. I don’t feel sorry for such fool that are unable to educate themselves and think for themselves. ????????????

In reviewing your posts on this topic a see biased opinions unsupported by facts.

 

Is that how educated people who think for themselves express themselves?

It doesn't get any swampier than Thomas.

On Saturday, CNN reported that Supreme Court Chief Justice John Roberts has chosen to not voluntarily testify before senators who have questions about how the nation's highest court is dealing with the growing controversies swirling around Justice Clarence Thomas.

 

https://www.rawstory.com/john-roberts-clarence-thomas/

Thomas seems to amend his filings at a greater rate than we have done for our Constitution.

 

And he is even more emboldened, given his denial of a stay on the Mifepristone cases, which are based on questionable legal doctrine, according to most experts. (The final vote on this case will be interesting.)

 

 

JUSTICE THOMAS would deny the applications for stays.

 

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/22a901_3d9g.pdf

 

It appears He's not the only one involved in a conflict of interest.

"Now, a new story shows that Thomas isn’t the only one who’s been less than forthcoming on his disclosure forms. Politico reports that Justice Neil Gorsuch, nominated by Donald Trump in 2017, sold a massive property he co-owned to the CEO of a law firm that often argues cases before the court."

https://news.yahoo.com/supreme-court-ethics-scandal-just-151500875.html