The worst thing about Supreme Court Clarence's Thomas failure to declare

[Baitball Blogger]

his wife's income:

Ginni Thomas' ties to the hard right are well known today. I mean, well-known by the public. The FBI and other organizations might have known earlier, but they did this country a great disservice by keeping the information to themselves. This was critical information because I'm convinced that public optics changes the direction of public policy. That goes both ways: good and bad. That's why FoxNews is so important to them, because it helps drive public opinion to the right.

And, in Thomas' situation, had we known about these financial payments when they happened, in the early years after 2000, we might have had a chance to be more forceful about media attention on these rats' activities.

Just think if the public could have been more aware of how compromised Thomas x 2 were. Would there have been more pressure in those Senate hearings to stop the the hard-right judges? Would Trump have lost bigly because we could have sussed the agenda sooner?

But, we weren't allowed to know, and Ginni Thomas was able to help orchestrate AND be a conduit for this country's worst internal assault since the Civil War.

And it's just too bad that media attention in the next few days will focus on Hurricane Ian, which will once again drown out public scrutiny of her actions.

[jimfields33]

1. Hurricane Ian is heading to category 5

Definitely deserves to be known. People’s lives are in danger.

[Baitball Blogger]

2. Oh, I agree.

I think it will stay at 4, but still catastrophic.

Florida shows are already being preempted to remain on the storm news, as they should be. What is going to happen on the west coast of Florida will be horrific. But, the story of Ginni Thomas' involvement should be kept present everywhere else. Time to multi-task.

[jimfields33]

3. I'd rather the news report it on Monday and do an in-depth look at it.

It happened in early 2000’s so anytime the story could be reported and it would be of interest to the nation. That’s a lot of Money 700,000 dollars for six years. We’re not talking about a lawnmower guy not adding his cash receipts. This is huge what Ginni did.

[empedocles]

4. Agree reports on big ginni next week. More evidence of pervasive

'con corruption.

My guess is that cost/benefit/timing considerations, merit a push towards
the big fishes like meadows, etc.

[Kingofalldems]

5. Looks like someone not liking this thread.

So kick big time.

I wonder if she even reported the income on her taxes?

[DENVERPOPS]

7. Dubious that she reported the 700K

It was during the Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld years and all of those big wigs thought they were immune to being prosecuted for any and all of their nefarious schemes and grifting.

If they didn't declare, it might mean he is just as guilty as she is because they both signed the return.
The fact that it went on for each and every year for five years is deplorable.......
The two of them should be in Leavenworth for a whole big bunch of years, but I suspect that they and hundreds of others who were even much bigger crooks will Never be charged or indicted.

[onenote]

12. The financial disclosure form doesn't require amount

It only requires that the name of the entity providing a justice’s spouse with income be disclosed.

[DENVERPOPS]

29. I was thinking more of the declaration of income

on the yearly tax return...........

[onetexan]

32. This!!

[msfiddlestix]

6. ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ ✔️ n/t

[Mr. Ected]

8. If only the other side valued integrity and forthrightness like we do

Instead of their galling, democracy-killing win-at-all-costs false bravado fakeness.

[BSdetect]

13. Another sickening case where the powerful are excused immediate charges.

Steal a can of tuna and off you goo straight away to court.

[Evolve Dammit]

20. truth

[Lonestarblue]

9. How is Ginni Thomas any less guilty than John Eastman for plotting an insurrection?

Plus, she called state elections officials and told them to overturn their state votes. How is this not an elections crime? Yet it’s doubtful that she has been investigated by the DOJ. Even the J6 Committee has shown her a great deal of deference. What this whole incident says is there there are indeed some special privileged people who are above the law in this country.

Since I do not believe that any husband can be totally ignorant of his wife’s activities, Clarence Thomas probably knew of what was to happen on January 6, or at least that something was planned that was dangerous. He had a duty to warn, but he did not. He is just as despicable as his wife. And we have to put up with this human excrement until he drops dead.

[Farmer-Rick]

15. I actually believe he knew everything and was supportive

He supports her other bizzare right wing hate fest ideas. Though I don't imagine he supports the discrimination and hate directed at black people from the right, though he seems unhinged so maybe.....

[rubbersole]

16. Self-loathing world class piece of shit.

This will not end well for Ginni and ClareClare. Bummer.

[bronxiteforever]

10. Kick & recommend for visibility

[bronxiteforever]

11. Kick & recommend for visibility

[Baitball Blogger]

25. Thank you for your help.

This helped to keep my mind off of Ian. The fact that this thread survived made me smile.

[spanone]

14. K&R

[onetexan]

17. the IRS needs to charge her with Tax Evasion

and the public should demand her crooked, sexual harrasser husband to resign.

[onenote]

19. where is it alleged that this income wasn't reported to the IRS

This is about a financial disclosure form, not a tax filing. And the form doesn't require the amount of income to be disclosed, just that there was income and the source.

Sometimes I wonder what has happened to reading comprehension on DU.

[onetexan]

27. I didnt read the article & assumed by not disclosing it

It meant they didn't claim her earnings on income tax. But that brings up anoyher question - did they actually claim on their returns the past 5 years or not?

BTW no need for the high & haughty snottery. Some of us have day jobs & read things in a spare minute.

[DENVERPOPS]

30. That was my point exactly up above

and I got the same..........

[Botany]

18. So Judge Thomas and Ginni Thomas hid 3/4 million $x in income from some right wing institute?

Why is Clarence still on the court?

[onenote]

23. He fucked up not reporting that she had income between 2003 and 2007 from Heritage and Hillsdale

But the form didn't require the amount of that income to be reported.

The whole thing was dropped after he amended the 2003-2007 forms in 2011.

[KPN]

21. Kicked.

[Sympthsical]

22. Except this has been known for 11 years

This came out in 2011 when President Obama's Justice Department was firmly running things. It was in the news at the time.

https://www.latimes.com/politics/la-xpm-2011-jan-22-la-na-thomas-disclosure-20110122-story.html

You know what's weird? Above the Law is kind of acting as if this is new information when they themselves covered it in 2011.

They wrote this article this week:

https://abovethelaw.com/2022/09/oh-look-another-clarence-thomas-ethics-scandal/

But they had the story 11 years ago:

https://abovethelaw.com/2011/01/clarence-thomas-and-his-wifes-680000-of-unreported-income/

And look at this whopper of a quote from them at the time:

"But at the end of the day, all we’re really learning is that Clarence Thomas’s wife has some strong opinions, and she was well compensated. That’s hardly a crime. It’s barely an issue. And it’s something we’re all going to have to get more comfortable with going forward."

That did not age well.

It's spreading on social media at the moment for various reasons, but the time to really care and spread it was 11 years ago. Now, just from a political perspective, no one's going to do anything about it.

No one "Kept this information to themselves." There's no, "What would we have done differently if we knew?" We did know. We just didn't care. But it is really, really, really weird to see people act like 1) This is new information that is 2) recent and 3) kept secret.

All that said, Thomas is problematic to say the least. The lack of ethics, the refusal to recuse when he clearly ought to. The Senate will never do anything. That's a pipe dream.

But this weird social media inability to laterally read and understand the basics of a story before it spreads is demoralizing. Took me less than one minute to fire up google and have all the details of the story, including the fact it has nothing to do with the IRS. It's not great when people won't take one simple minute before reacting to something and repeating erroneous things and making egregiously misguided demands.

But seriously. The Supreme Court needs ethics rules. It's insane they do not have them.

[onenote]

24. +1

[Baitball Blogger]

26. +2

[Autumn]

28. Worst thing is that it shows we have tiered justice in this country.

Fuck that.

[Baitball Blogger]

31. Exactly what it means.

The things I learned in my years in Florida and, by extension the US, allegedly:

Lawyers aren't afraid of breaking their ethic rules,

Certain people are above the law,

The Supreme Court is not objective,

The Court can weld more power than either the Executive or Legislative branches of government. There is no concept of checks and balances in America.

Police are not always your friends.

Neighbors is a geographical term, referring to the proximity that someone lives to you.

Neighborly is a term to be feared, since you never know what people want when they're being nice to you, since they never have before.

[I_UndergroundPanther]

33. True that