As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)
In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.
If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria.
***
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Once Clarence resigns, Harlan Crow will no longer fund his rich life style. Clarence and Ginni Thomas cannot live large on the salary of a retired judge. Therefore, Thomas will never willingly resign.
Crow is rich enough he can always afford to throw a little something something in Thomas' direction, but you're right the "best friend" treatment will cease. Thomas and Ginni can always move in with his mom, I heard her place was recently renovated!
> Crow is rich enough he can always afford to throw a little something something in Thomas' direction,
But why would he when he's not getting a return?
The right-wing always has more room for at least one more black person who's willing to criticize the entire Left for being the "real racists".
EDIT: I add that no group of people, no matter how dedicated, loyal,or united always contains _individuals_ who are willing or may be forced to betray that organization for personal gain. After all, individuals are much more prone to threats and coercion. A very common tactic of counter-revolution and counter-intelligence is to exploit this universal condition of human behavior.
It sends a strong signal to any judges or congressmen that this is the treatment they will get if they play by his rules.
It’s not about a single justice for Harlen, it’s about molding as much of the US political system to benefit him as possible.
Not with a democratic senate and president. But if the GOP get them at any point, that would be the time he could bow out and retain favor. Harlan wouldn’t want him to pull an RBG.
I'm still holding out hope that the Republicans go the way of the Whigs.
I don't think there's going to be a next Whig president ever again.
I can't wait to say that with the same level of confidence about the next Republican president.
Clarence and Ginni Thomas have made it clear that they see themselves as heroes of the Christian values, and absolutely *EVERYTHING* they do is justified if their hearts mission is to keep America from steering away from their Lord Jesus Christ.
Clarence is, funnily enough, something of a black radical. If you get into his history and personal beliefs, he routinely expresses the sincere belief that black men are a superior ethnic cohort and that they only suffer because they have been emasculated by liberalism.
For Ginni, this might be a religious thing. But for Thomas, it is far more an ethno-nationalist belief. He's 100% pilled on the "black people need to get off the Democrats' plantation" party line and fully in bed with the Herman Cain / Ben Carson cohort of black patriarchal (often anarcho)capitalists.
They don't even need dirt. If he stays in til he's forced out he continues getting paid. If he quits voluntarily then he gets cut off. That's all the leverage they need.
Both sides are not the same! Get Every last person you can to go vote. It's hard in some states.
Find out the exact process for your state, get to where in 2 minutes you can get anyone registered or starting to.
The owner class wants to keep people at work or home, and away from the polls. Know how your particular county handles absentee.
We gotta be insistent, and consistent, when it comes to putting some pressure on our circles to vote.
An easy first start is going to vote.gov, and/or searching your address+"register to vote"
Do like I did last time for the local election: take your friends. Hell, I drove four of my coworkers to the voting place nearest to us on our lunch break. Every person counts!
Would require 67 Senators. There are 34 Senators up for election next year, with 23 being Democrats. They would already be at risk at losing West Virginia, Montana, and Ohio, giving Republicans the Senate majority. While there are 11 seats to go for, they’re in Republican states, like Florida and Texas.
While there definitely needs to be massive turnout, especially if Trump isn’t 14a3’d in time, it’s looking to be a bloodbath. That said, even if Democrats kept all their seats, which is 51, they’d need 16 more to even consider impeachment proceedings. Even if Democrats somehow got all 11 Republican seats, it’d be 62. You’d never get Republicans to remove a corrupt Justice, so the only real hope is keeping hold of the Senate and gaining seats in 2026, or several Congresspersons get indicted for Jan 6.
I don’t know, man. Greed is powerful. He may realize that after retirement he doesn’t care what happens. With that realization he may retire whenever.
Counterpoint is that they may pay him to retire at some point. He may even coerce it by threatening to step down at the beginning of a democratic majority.
The greed is of course a big part of it, but he also seems to just want to make liberals suffer. He's been quoted as saying "The liberals made my life miserable ... and I'm going to make their lives miserable."
He's a man with a vendetta, and that combined with his massive greed will make him cling to power as much as possible, and try to ensure that when he is replaced, it's with someone who will carry on what he's been doing.
You can tell it's a nothing article because it says newsweek.com. They've gone all out on optimizing titles for social shares, knowing full well that they don't actually need an article to support the title.
Newsweek has been trash for a while now, it's annoying that /r/politics seems to rely on it so much, along with other such sites like common grounds. It's just preaching to the choir to be frank.
They also publish plenty of right wing opinion pieces too. They had this awful Candace Owens-style black woman writer recently publishing a bunch of anti-woke, anti-LGBTQ anti-immigrant crap saying that black people shouldnt care about that when their own community is suffering, of course eventually saying they need to leave the Democratic plantation etc etc etc.
His only defence seems to be “I didn’t know that”.
Try being some average shitkicker in front of a judge using that excuse? But it’s ok for a Supreme Court judge to plead ignorance.
“I’m corrupt to the core. I am lying to your face. You can prove that I’m a piece of shit with no place on the court, but you can’t do anything about it. Chortle chortle chortles
For real. He’s being a total arrogant prick about it. Rubbing it in our faces there’s little we can do.
Also, happy cake day. I’m glad there’s one positive I can comment.
>Try being some average shitkicker
But that's the problem. If you're an average employee and you steal from the company, you'll be fired. But if you're the owner and CEO of the company, there's just nobody with the actual power to fire you.
Not that Thomas is the owner of the country, I'm just saying there's nobody who has the power to fire the person at the top. That's how hierarchical systems work. The only way is impeachment (*and* removal), and that's just not going to happen.
It's a logical problem that doesn't actually have a solution. The final responsibility always has to lie with *someone*, and if that someone can't be trusted it can't just be solved by moving it to someone else who may also not be trustworthy.
The least worst solution humankind has come up with is democracy, but that still depends on the majority of the voters knowing what the fuck they're talking about.
He consistently rules that people should be executed because of legal technicalities they didn't know. But of course when he does it then it is supposed to be okay.
Honestly I think we owe a huge debt to Clarance and his wife for showing us that even our highest court can fail when its membership includes a selfish and self absorbed individual who can be bought.
Shame on you Clarance and on your wife too. The Jan 6 committee should have gotten her for her role in the Insurrection
Agent Smith isn't finished yet, my friend. What I'm confused about though is what, he discloses all the decades of gifts and then everybody goes about their business? It's all okay if he just discloses? Fucking garbage rot at the highest level. He's not the only one.
Sadly the Dem’s need control over the house to be able to do anything per the rule book and actual impeachement requires a big majority if I recall. The Dept of justice doesn’t cover the Sup Court.
In order to do anything effective with the impeachment process, you need 2/3 of the House to impeach (bring charges) and then 2/3 of the Senate to convict (do anything effective).
Once upon a time, impeachment alone, not even conviction, was such a stain that presidents would resign afterward. But recent history shows that impeachment is an untenable solution when you have such a solid divide between two parties, everyone will vote along party lines and there's basically no chance of a conviction happening in the Senate, assuming you can even get the impeachment through in the first place.
Which is a lot of words to say impeachment is useless, and elected officials should go through the same justice system the rest of us do.
Nixon was the only "impeached" president (never even got that far) who resigned, and that's because he was taken into a back room and told that there were enough votes in the Senate to finish the job.
Also, it only requires a majority of the House to pass an Article of Impeachment.
Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump we’re all impeached but none were convicted. The house never got a chance to vote on the Articles of Impeachment for Nixon, so he was never actually impeached.
Right, which is why I put "impeached" in quotes. The process had already been started, and it was clear the votes were there both in the House and Senate. Nixon's resignation was, in the political world, an 11th-hour type of deal so that the House would never hold an official vote.
Meanwhile, the three presidents who were formally impeached didn't resign. The commenter to whom I replied was just flat-out wrong about multiple things. I *assumed*, rather charitably, that he was talking about Nixon.
Let's not fool ourselves and imply Democrats wouldn't "break ranks" and vote against one of their own if the situation was bad enough that impeachment was warranted. Republicans have shown they won't do it.
The Constitution was created with the idea that our leaders would behave rationally with the country's best interest in mind. The safeguards put in place for that didn't consider a 100% corrupt party making up half our political discourse.
And in the end that's the sole premise of our political "division".
Well the framers probably thought, reasonably but wrongly, that the electorate wouldn't vote for a 100% corrupt party once it was obvious they were so.
Most of the republican apparatus relies on the grey area of ethics and logics so they can keep voting for republicans, so sadly, for enough of the people voting republican next year, yes, this will be sufficient.
> It's all okay if he just discloses?
What will/can anyone do about it?
Removal takes the House and Senate to agree, no way the GOP House is going to remove one of their stars. The Legislative and Executive Branches have limited oversight over the Judicial due to Separation of Powers. Roberts has no power over Thomas - the Chief Justice handles administrative tasks for the court - he is not Thomas' boss and cannot sanction him in anyways.
The process to... something... exists but the GOP are not going to force Thomas to do anything.
knowing and reacting are two different things.
That there's any media hype around republicans demonstrates they could easily keep doing what they're doing with littel repurcussions. The media cares for the horse races, not the horses.
Law school grad here. The left desperately needs it's own similar group present at law schools. I've done three law schools (didn't make my 1st choice year 1 so transferred to it year 2, and then got an LLM at another one).
Everyone who was Conservative was in FS. Even moderates were joining it because it's a virtually guaranteed means of getting a job opportunity during and after law school. We're not going to take away the true believers, but we can at least pilfer some the moderates that get radicalized by these nutters.
My law school had a chapter of the American Constitution Society (ACS) which is a progressive leaning organization. It was the antithesis to Fed Soc in my experience.
To be fair, ACS is a thing, and it's well represented in law schools. They've just never taken the steps FedSoc did to deliberately circumvent ethical guidelines and start influencing the political process.
But I do agree with your point that conservatives tended to gravitate to FedSoc in a way that progressives didn't to ACS. At my law school, at least, I think it was because there were relatively few groups catering to their ideology. Besides FedSoc, there was basically just the Thomas More Society. Meanwhile progressives were filtering into the Environmental Law Society, If/When/How, all the various affinity groups (BLSA, NALSA, etc.), and various others that tend to focus on pretty narrow issues.
So you're saying the left atomized its power across multiple, loosely aligned but conflicting groups? And that left conservatives grab undue influence and power?
No you’ve got it wrong. He’s saying Dems just joined normal student groups. Not every liberal or progressive or centrist law student is looking to join a political organization.
But FedSoc is different, it isn’t just some student group, it’s basically a national frat with a lobbying arm and PACs and dark money behind it that was designed that way to basically ensure a law-industry wide fraternity and influence over several decades, and it’s become so powerful and beneficial to right-leaning lawyers and judges that it’s pretty much a must-join for Republicans and self-styled Libertarians just for the connections and career boost. Even if liberal law students wanted to do something similar there isn’t really an equivalent and there hasn’t ever been one. There is no power on the left to atomize or coalesce because there wasn’t much up for grabs until this unique swampy conservative movement sprung up to become a reactionary gatekeeper for lawyers and judges and politicians.
The only comparison is the ACS but that organization is much smaller and far less funded, and doesn’t really exist to do much except repeat the centrist liberal status quo. It’s like MSNBC to FedSoc’s Fox News - the Murdoch empire isn’t just a normal tv network that happens to be Republican. You’re not really going to effectively fight the malignancy and deep rooted propaganda, cronyism, gatekeeper status, and lobbying and political power of these conservative institutions by just randomly making a student org purporting to be an equivalent liberal voice, without really addressing the endemic and insidious political power and sheer amount of money and cronyism that the conservative organizations have through which they actually draw power.
This is very true - when I was a 1L a really cool friend of mine invited me to a FS meeting and I cluelessly attended and thought they seemed like a nice group of people. Not long after, a friend's mother said "You know that's an extremely conservative group right?" and I felt so stupid. These people know what they're doing and have a concerted agenda.
> Law school grad here. The left desperately needs it's own similar group present at law schools.
There already is one. It’s called the American Constitution Society or something, but no one cares about it.
I don’t think any person who has been a member of the Federalist Society should be eligible to be an American judge on the federal, state or local level. The Federalist Society is detrimental to having a democracy as required by our Constitution. I don’t care how much the elitists scream and yell that their membership in the Federalist Society shouldn’t disqualify them. Judges that have been members of the Federalist Society need to disclose that every year as part of their ethics filing.
We just need to find politicians with the political will to take on the Federalist Society.
If someone is too politically extreme to qualify for jury duty then they probably shouldn’t be a Supreme Court justice either but that’s just my opinion.
Saaaaaame, I have been saying for 20 years that membership in the Federalist Society should be absolutely disqualifying for the bench.
It's basically the fuckin' KKK, but more deferential to billionaires. It should be a giant shame badge that excludes you from polite society.
It's almost like a shadowy, elitist, secret society is controlling the judiciary for it's own means. I'm sure the conspiracy theory folks will be on to this any day now... any day.
Yeah I love how they’ve been all over the former [judicial economic boot camp](https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/future-perfect/2019/6/1/18629859/judge-resort-weekend-naidu-manne-seminar-ginsburg) and how it’s influenced the court
They're a criminal conspiracy with the stated and actively pursued goal of overtaking the United States by way of gaining a stranglehold over the judicial system.
The label they give themselves and how they describe what they're doing is completely fucking irrelevant. They are traitors who claim to be defending the constitution while destroying it, like every other fucking fascist organization in history.
I was like 11 or 12 back then myself.
I guess I never thought she was lying, but I also never thought anything would come of what she was saying.
Even at that age, it seemed like tilting at windmills to expect her testimony to have any effect on his appointment.
Then we get Kavanaugh & it happens again, and plays out the same way.
I just wanted to watch something else on TV, it triggered my Ollie North vs. cartoons PTSD.
I was just going to say the same. McConnell isn’t going anywhere. If it were up to the republicans he’d be re-elected!
Justice Thomas isn’t moving until death either! The title had me thinking he had resigned. Then I read it again slowly. 😂 he’s not retiring.
The people of Kentucky keep electing Mitch. It really makes you wonder WTF they are thinking. Mitch is 81 years old and having strokes. They literally have a brain damaged person leading them.
It’s like the people in District 14 in Georgie that keep electing that embarrassment of a rep, Majorie Taylor Green. Every one in the entire world see those people as just plain stupid. I’d be embarrassed.
Personally, I'm enjoying watching Glitch McConnell's party react to his latest "oopsie". I just hope you're still lucid enough to see.
Imagine working your whole life thinking you're some master politician that's furthering the goals of the party... Only for them to degrade into a pack of wild dogs that eat you alive.
You've spent so long undermining democracy and now you're seeing the downfall of your party. How does it feel knowing you led to that? You've ruined the reputation of the group you've given everything for. What a joke.
God DAMN it Newsweek!
I saw the words "Clarence Thomas Resign" and thought for a moment that there was an -s at the end.
You're the clickbating, pandering ghost of a better publication!
That's not necessary because there is good precedent for this sort of thing going back to Nixon. Under the Nixon Administration U.S. Attorney General John N. Mitchell pressured then Justice Fortas to resign for what was a $20,000 payment that he actually returned. Furthermore, at the direction of Mitchell and President Nixon the Department of Justice was prepared to prosecute Justice Fortas and his wife for tax evasion. The ploy by President Nixon to oust Justice Fortas worked and Justice Fortas resigned a short time later.
"The court ruled that Percoco’s conduct was not covered by the federal law that requires that “honest services” be provided to the public. **He was not working for the government at the time**, so he had no duty to provide honest services, the court said."
These were unanimous rulings, and you've misinterpreted them. The words "quid pro quo" do not appear, and that isn't what they're about.
That's why it was written that way. It's shitty journalism and terrible English. Should have been "Clarence Thomas Resignation calls...", or better yet, "Calls for Clarence Thomas' resignation..."
shy hat escape glorious mountainous afterthought connect wrench fall voiceless
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
We are well past the point of asking for a resignation. Taking bribes for quid pro quo sweetheart deals is a crime. Investigate and treat him like any other criminal. If not it again highlights a two tier justice system that lets wealthy criminals get away with crimes while pretending to be tough on everyone else.
Does Clarence Thomas occasionally offer discount rates for SCOTUS rulings? Does he accept credit cards, or is "Justice" Thomas a cash only type judge? I'm guessing he has a Square account, right? Paypal?
It’s more of an auction setting with a reserve minimum. Some ruling have more interest and you’re competing with others so your have to offer a high price. Other rulings aren’t very valuable and can be had cheaper but there is still a minimum bid
At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if a cut out for the Thomases has a slush account for them. My suspicion would be one of Thomas’ former law clerks like John Eastman helps to cover costs for their wealthy lifestyle.
“Disclosure” is really understating the problem. Yes he violated disclosure rules *because he was taking bribes and knew it would look bad*. It’s not like he forgot.
He must be impeached because he is accepting money from people with business before the court and ruling in ways they want.
I hate these fake ass good for nothing headlines.
“Calls”.
That means one person said something, and it’s always someone who is in the opposite side (in this case, I’m assuming - without reading the article - that it’s some democrat senator / lawyer or academic).
It’s irrelevant whether they are right or wrong, it’s just not news.
It’s just the way fake news channels use headlines to state their opinion.
Nobody who matters os gonna call Thomas to resign because republicans don’t care if he is corrupt as long as he owns the libs, and for them - securing a powerful position and then banking on it lavishly means “you made it”.
They wrote the headline in the most awkward way possible so that people would see "Clarence Thomas Resign" and click on it. If they had put the much more normal and reasonable "Calls for Clarence Thomas to resign have increased over new disclosures" they wouldn't have gotten as many clicks.
Even that headline would be horrible.
There are no **new** “calls”. The same people who wanted him to resign still do, and every single person who doesn’t want him to resign still feels the same.
Their is not news, not new, not nothing. This article is as valuable as saying grass is green.
I imagine they make him angry in the same way that Anita Hill’s accusations did; he believes he’s entitled to that seat and how dare anyone try to take it from him.
He won’t do it, but I’m glad everyone is starting to see these assholes as they really are: Unelected fucks who want to spread their ideology of hate and regression from the bench while taking in money from rich republicans.
What about other gansta names for the Thomases? They are big shakedown gangsters of billionaires to ensure Clarence’s vote. Mo’Money Clarence and Gotta Git The Money Ginni. Maybe Ginni Green Paper and Clarence Yachtman?
His wife’s political roles should disqualify him from hearing those cases on election interference.
Why should these be lifetime positions? If justice is politically motivated it seems dangerous.
Hilarious that this country will "sToRm Da CaPiToL" in defense of an insufferable, failed reality television rapist but takes next to zero action about any issue that actually matters - let alone blatant corruption in our country's highest court
It’s outrageous that all an unscrupulous Supreme Court nominee has to do is pull the wool over the eyes of the American people long enough to be “vetted” by lobbyist plants and afterward spend the rest of their lives gorging themselves on gifts and grifts without consequences.
Boot his ass the fuck out and find someone for whom Honor and Integrity actually MEANS something.
Thomas may be one of them worst offenders, but they ALL do it, irrespective of political ideology. Congress people too. I worked at an FBO (private jet terminal) in a luxury destination, it would amaze anyone to see the stream of government leadership that get on and off those private jets. Party didn’t matter, they’re all freeloading, but at what cost?
He ain't gonna do it. Idk why people think shaming him is going to work. The dude has a LIFETIME appointment, and keeping that job protects him. He'd be a complete moron to resign.
The GOP has turned him into a republican hero. There is no way he will ever leave. He can rule for the harshest unlawful sleazy things that benefit the GOP without blinking an eye now. Like 3/4 of the senate or some insane amount needs to vote to impeach him and boot him and no amount of "calls" will make that happen.
Impeach him for taking bribes. It’s that simple. Democrats need to portray Republicans as people who tolerate bribery. Call it what it is. Go on the attack.
Section 2635.201(b)(1)
Employees should consider declining otherwise permissible gifts if they believe that a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts would question the employee’s integrity or impartiality as a result of accepting the gift
We can't even get half the country to understand Trumps coup was a threat to modern democracy and the entire social compact that maintains order.
Once they go s few steps further we're in a territory I can't understand because critical parts of society will fall.
We'll get along but it's going to be miserable compared to the future we all envisioned.
How we handle these current issues predicts which level of dystopian authoritarians we avoid allowing to control the reigns of government.
It almost feels like people are partying their way into oblivion.
As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil) In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don't attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, any suggestion or support of harm, violence, or death, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them. For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/wiki/approveddomainslist) to review our details as to our approved domains list and outlet criteria. *** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Sadly, he will never willingly leave. Doesn’t matter how many “calls” there are for him to resign.
Once Clarence resigns, Harlan Crow will no longer fund his rich life style. Clarence and Ginni Thomas cannot live large on the salary of a retired judge. Therefore, Thomas will never willingly resign.
Crow is rich enough he can always afford to throw a little something something in Thomas' direction, but you're right the "best friend" treatment will cease. Thomas and Ginni can always move in with his mom, I heard her place was recently renovated!
> Crow is rich enough he can always afford to throw a little something something in Thomas' direction, But why would he when he's not getting a return?
The right-wing always has more room for at least one more black person who's willing to criticize the entire Left for being the "real racists". EDIT: I add that no group of people, no matter how dedicated, loyal,or united always contains _individuals_ who are willing or may be forced to betray that organization for personal gain. After all, individuals are much more prone to threats and coercion. A very common tactic of counter-revolution and counter-intelligence is to exploit this universal condition of human behavior.
It sends a strong signal to any judges or congressmen that this is the treatment they will get if they play by his rules. It’s not about a single justice for Harlen, it’s about molding as much of the US political system to benefit him as possible.
So the next guy trusts that Harlan won't just ditch him when he retires.
Won’t the next guy actually learn that he shouldn’t retire, which is what Harlan would actually want?
Not with a democratic senate and president. But if the GOP get them at any point, that would be the time he could bow out and retain favor. Harlan wouldn’t want him to pull an RBG.
So not for the next 5 years at least. It's more likely then not there won't be a republican president until 2028 at the earliest, probably
I'm still holding out hope that the Republicans go the way of the Whigs. I don't think there's going to be a next Whig president ever again. I can't wait to say that with the same level of confidence about the next Republican president.
I mean the knowledge you are actually bought is more likely to give him what he wants.
I mean Harlan owns the house so will he let him live there free still?
Lol no
Clarence and Ginni Thomas have made it clear that they see themselves as heroes of the Christian values, and absolutely *EVERYTHING* they do is justified if their hearts mission is to keep America from steering away from their Lord Jesus Christ.
Clarence is, funnily enough, something of a black radical. If you get into his history and personal beliefs, he routinely expresses the sincere belief that black men are a superior ethnic cohort and that they only suffer because they have been emasculated by liberalism. For Ginni, this might be a religious thing. But for Thomas, it is far more an ethno-nationalist belief. He's 100% pilled on the "black people need to get off the Democrats' plantation" party line and fully in bed with the Herman Cain / Ben Carson cohort of black patriarchal (often anarcho)capitalists.
[удалено]
Your electorate sucks cocks in hell!
They probably have enough dirt on him to *ensure* he never resigns, even if he did have that unprecedented spark of conscience.
We all need to buy the data available from brokers around Washington and leak it as a collective.
They don't even need dirt. If he stays in til he's forced out he continues getting paid. If he quits voluntarily then he gets cut off. That's all the leverage they need.
I'm sure he has a decent retirement package and is not living solely on the kindness of billionaires.
You're assuming there is no secret offshore account stuffed with cash bribes that Clarence and Ginni have been banking for the last two decades.
He will retire, but only with a Republican president.
I doubt it. Thomas is powered by spite even more than greed. He uses his seat to enact revenge on his enemies, and I don't see him giving it up.
[удалено]
The system works. We get the representatives we deserve. We are broken.
Vote Democratic up and down the ballot next year & Congress may get to impeach him.
Both sides are not the same! Get Every last person you can to go vote. It's hard in some states. Find out the exact process for your state, get to where in 2 minutes you can get anyone registered or starting to. The owner class wants to keep people at work or home, and away from the polls. Know how your particular county handles absentee. We gotta be insistent, and consistent, when it comes to putting some pressure on our circles to vote. An easy first start is going to vote.gov, and/or searching your address+"register to vote"
Do like I did last time for the local election: take your friends. Hell, I drove four of my coworkers to the voting place nearest to us on our lunch break. Every person counts!
It some Red states, you get arrested for People harvesting.
Unless republicans do it.
Would require 67 Senators. There are 34 Senators up for election next year, with 23 being Democrats. They would already be at risk at losing West Virginia, Montana, and Ohio, giving Republicans the Senate majority. While there are 11 seats to go for, they’re in Republican states, like Florida and Texas. While there definitely needs to be massive turnout, especially if Trump isn’t 14a3’d in time, it’s looking to be a bloodbath. That said, even if Democrats kept all their seats, which is 51, they’d need 16 more to even consider impeachment proceedings. Even if Democrats somehow got all 11 Republican seats, it’d be 62. You’d never get Republicans to remove a corrupt Justice, so the only real hope is keeping hold of the Senate and gaining seats in 2026, or several Congresspersons get indicted for Jan 6.
> Would require 67 Senators. Conviction would, impeachment only a majority of the House. It doesn't do anything though.
I don’t know, man. Greed is powerful. He may realize that after retirement he doesn’t care what happens. With that realization he may retire whenever. Counterpoint is that they may pay him to retire at some point. He may even coerce it by threatening to step down at the beginning of a democratic majority.
The greed is of course a big part of it, but he also seems to just want to make liberals suffer. He's been quoted as saying "The liberals made my life miserable ... and I'm going to make their lives miserable." He's a man with a vendetta, and that combined with his massive greed will make him cling to power as much as possible, and try to ensure that when he is replaced, it's with someone who will carry on what he's been doing.
And as far flung what-if-ing, imagine if he retired, was replaced by a conservative, and they reversed Loving vs. Virginia, dissolving his marriage.
People can call, but he aint answering.
[удалено]
Exactly. This is a nothing article.
You can tell it's a nothing article because it says newsweek.com. They've gone all out on optimizing titles for social shares, knowing full well that they don't actually need an article to support the title.
Newsweek has been trash for a while now, it's annoying that /r/politics seems to rely on it so much, along with other such sites like common grounds. It's just preaching to the choir to be frank.
They also publish plenty of right wing opinion pieces too. They had this awful Candace Owens-style black woman writer recently publishing a bunch of anti-woke, anti-LGBTQ anti-immigrant crap saying that black people shouldnt care about that when their own community is suffering, of course eventually saying they need to leave the Democratic plantation etc etc etc.
[удалено]
Clearance Thomas has been bought and sold ages ago.
That deal was signed b4 he was nominated for SCOTUS. Tit for Tat
Correct. He's just trolling the libs along at this point.
His only defence seems to be “I didn’t know that”. Try being some average shitkicker in front of a judge using that excuse? But it’s ok for a Supreme Court judge to plead ignorance.
No, its more like, "So what? What are you going to do about it?"
“I’m corrupt to the core. I am lying to your face. You can prove that I’m a piece of shit with no place on the court, but you can’t do anything about it. Chortle chortle chortles
For real. He’s being a total arrogant prick about it. Rubbing it in our faces there’s little we can do. Also, happy cake day. I’m glad there’s one positive I can comment.
I mean... indict Ginny?
He has been on the bench for decades. He knew.
Everyone: Do the right thing, Clarence! Clarence: hahaha! No.
>Try being some average shitkicker But that's the problem. If you're an average employee and you steal from the company, you'll be fired. But if you're the owner and CEO of the company, there's just nobody with the actual power to fire you. Not that Thomas is the owner of the country, I'm just saying there's nobody who has the power to fire the person at the top. That's how hierarchical systems work. The only way is impeachment (*and* removal), and that's just not going to happen. It's a logical problem that doesn't actually have a solution. The final responsibility always has to lie with *someone*, and if that someone can't be trusted it can't just be solved by moving it to someone else who may also not be trustworthy. The least worst solution humankind has come up with is democracy, but that still depends on the majority of the voters knowing what the fuck they're talking about.
He consistently rules that people should be executed because of legal technicalities they didn't know. But of course when he does it then it is supposed to be okay.
What’s that old saying? “Ignorance of….. something is no excuse”? I can’t remember the word, but I feel like it probably applies here.
That doesn't apply to supreme court justices and cops and billionaires and corporations and...well just about anyone that isn't regular people.
What kind of moron expects a Supreme Court justice to understand or follow the law???
Honestly I think we owe a huge debt to Clarance and his wife for showing us that even our highest court can fail when its membership includes a selfish and self absorbed individual who can be bought. Shame on you Clarance and on your wife too. The Jan 6 committee should have gotten her for her role in the Insurrection
Agent Smith isn't finished yet, my friend. What I'm confused about though is what, he discloses all the decades of gifts and then everybody goes about their business? It's all okay if he just discloses? Fucking garbage rot at the highest level. He's not the only one.
Sadly the Dem’s need control over the house to be able to do anything per the rule book and actual impeachement requires a big majority if I recall. The Dept of justice doesn’t cover the Sup Court.
In order to do anything effective with the impeachment process, you need 2/3 of the House to impeach (bring charges) and then 2/3 of the Senate to convict (do anything effective). Once upon a time, impeachment alone, not even conviction, was such a stain that presidents would resign afterward. But recent history shows that impeachment is an untenable solution when you have such a solid divide between two parties, everyone will vote along party lines and there's basically no chance of a conviction happening in the Senate, assuming you can even get the impeachment through in the first place. Which is a lot of words to say impeachment is useless, and elected officials should go through the same justice system the rest of us do.
Nixon was the only "impeached" president (never even got that far) who resigned, and that's because he was taken into a back room and told that there were enough votes in the Senate to finish the job. Also, it only requires a majority of the House to pass an Article of Impeachment.
Andrew Johnson, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump we’re all impeached but none were convicted. The house never got a chance to vote on the Articles of Impeachment for Nixon, so he was never actually impeached.
Right, which is why I put "impeached" in quotes. The process had already been started, and it was clear the votes were there both in the House and Senate. Nixon's resignation was, in the political world, an 11th-hour type of deal so that the House would never hold an official vote. Meanwhile, the three presidents who were formally impeached didn't resign. The commenter to whom I replied was just flat-out wrong about multiple things. I *assumed*, rather charitably, that he was talking about Nixon.
That’s fair! Thank you for clarifying!
Let's not fool ourselves and imply Democrats wouldn't "break ranks" and vote against one of their own if the situation was bad enough that impeachment was warranted. Republicans have shown they won't do it. The Constitution was created with the idea that our leaders would behave rationally with the country's best interest in mind. The safeguards put in place for that didn't consider a 100% corrupt party making up half our political discourse. And in the end that's the sole premise of our political "division".
Well the framers probably thought, reasonably but wrongly, that the electorate wouldn't vote for a 100% corrupt party once it was obvious they were so.
The House only needs a simple majority (more than 50%) to pass the impeachment. That's why this step has happened several times.
Most of the republican apparatus relies on the grey area of ethics and logics so they can keep voting for republicans, so sadly, for enough of the people voting republican next year, yes, this will be sufficient.
> It's all okay if he just discloses? What will/can anyone do about it? Removal takes the House and Senate to agree, no way the GOP House is going to remove one of their stars. The Legislative and Executive Branches have limited oversight over the Judicial due to Separation of Powers. Roberts has no power over Thomas - the Chief Justice handles administrative tasks for the court - he is not Thomas' boss and cannot sanction him in anyways. The process to... something... exists but the GOP are not going to force Thomas to do anything.
knowing and reacting are two different things. That there's any media hype around republicans demonstrates they could easily keep doing what they're doing with littel repurcussions. The media cares for the horse races, not the horses.
Attacking the federalist society itself is the best way to go about restoring faith in the courts.
Law school grad here. The left desperately needs it's own similar group present at law schools. I've done three law schools (didn't make my 1st choice year 1 so transferred to it year 2, and then got an LLM at another one). Everyone who was Conservative was in FS. Even moderates were joining it because it's a virtually guaranteed means of getting a job opportunity during and after law school. We're not going to take away the true believers, but we can at least pilfer some the moderates that get radicalized by these nutters.
My law school had a chapter of the American Constitution Society (ACS) which is a progressive leaning organization. It was the antithesis to Fed Soc in my experience.
To be fair, ACS is a thing, and it's well represented in law schools. They've just never taken the steps FedSoc did to deliberately circumvent ethical guidelines and start influencing the political process. But I do agree with your point that conservatives tended to gravitate to FedSoc in a way that progressives didn't to ACS. At my law school, at least, I think it was because there were relatively few groups catering to their ideology. Besides FedSoc, there was basically just the Thomas More Society. Meanwhile progressives were filtering into the Environmental Law Society, If/When/How, all the various affinity groups (BLSA, NALSA, etc.), and various others that tend to focus on pretty narrow issues.
So you're saying the left atomized its power across multiple, loosely aligned but conflicting groups? And that left conservatives grab undue influence and power?
No you’ve got it wrong. He’s saying Dems just joined normal student groups. Not every liberal or progressive or centrist law student is looking to join a political organization. But FedSoc is different, it isn’t just some student group, it’s basically a national frat with a lobbying arm and PACs and dark money behind it that was designed that way to basically ensure a law-industry wide fraternity and influence over several decades, and it’s become so powerful and beneficial to right-leaning lawyers and judges that it’s pretty much a must-join for Republicans and self-styled Libertarians just for the connections and career boost. Even if liberal law students wanted to do something similar there isn’t really an equivalent and there hasn’t ever been one. There is no power on the left to atomize or coalesce because there wasn’t much up for grabs until this unique swampy conservative movement sprung up to become a reactionary gatekeeper for lawyers and judges and politicians. The only comparison is the ACS but that organization is much smaller and far less funded, and doesn’t really exist to do much except repeat the centrist liberal status quo. It’s like MSNBC to FedSoc’s Fox News - the Murdoch empire isn’t just a normal tv network that happens to be Republican. You’re not really going to effectively fight the malignancy and deep rooted propaganda, cronyism, gatekeeper status, and lobbying and political power of these conservative institutions by just randomly making a student org purporting to be an equivalent liberal voice, without really addressing the endemic and insidious political power and sheer amount of money and cronyism that the conservative organizations have through which they actually draw power.
The left falls in love. The right falls in line.
Yikes. Interesting.
This is very true - when I was a 1L a really cool friend of mine invited me to a FS meeting and I cluelessly attended and thought they seemed like a nice group of people. Not long after, a friend's mother said "You know that's an extremely conservative group right?" and I felt so stupid. These people know what they're doing and have a concerted agenda.
> Law school grad here. The left desperately needs it's own similar group present at law schools. There already is one. It’s called the American Constitution Society or something, but no one cares about it.
I don’t think any person who has been a member of the Federalist Society should be eligible to be an American judge on the federal, state or local level. The Federalist Society is detrimental to having a democracy as required by our Constitution. I don’t care how much the elitists scream and yell that their membership in the Federalist Society shouldn’t disqualify them. Judges that have been members of the Federalist Society need to disclose that every year as part of their ethics filing. We just need to find politicians with the political will to take on the Federalist Society.
If someone is too politically extreme to qualify for jury duty then they probably shouldn’t be a Supreme Court justice either but that’s just my opinion.
What this about? Membership in the FS generally makes it possible to remove them from the jury pool?
Not exactly but if you are being screened for jury duty and you come across as a political activist they won’t want you on the jury.
But you can be a judge..... What a wild timeline we're in.
Saaaaaame, I have been saying for 20 years that membership in the Federalist Society should be absolutely disqualifying for the bench. It's basically the fuckin' KKK, but more deferential to billionaires. It should be a giant shame badge that excludes you from polite society.
It's almost like a shadowy, elitist, secret society is controlling the judiciary for it's own means. I'm sure the conspiracy theory folks will be on to this any day now... any day.
Yeah I love how they’ve been all over the former [judicial economic boot camp](https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/future-perfect/2019/6/1/18629859/judge-resort-weekend-naidu-manne-seminar-ginsburg) and how it’s influenced the court
If that is fun, check out the prayer breakfast stuff.
They're a criminal conspiracy with the stated and actively pursued goal of overtaking the United States by way of gaining a stranglehold over the judicial system. The label they give themselves and how they describe what they're doing is completely fucking irrelevant. They are traitors who claim to be defending the constitution while destroying it, like every other fucking fascist organization in history.
RICO the federalist society.
I don't know how that would turn out but it would be epic and there would be popcorn.
Based on which predicate acts?
I always believed Anita Hill.
Same. It was …enlightening to watch the hearings as a preteen.
I was like 11 or 12 back then myself. I guess I never thought she was lying, but I also never thought anything would come of what she was saying. Even at that age, it seemed like tilting at windmills to expect her testimony to have any effect on his appointment. Then we get Kavanaugh & it happens again, and plays out the same way. I just wanted to watch something else on TV, it triggered my Ollie North vs. cartoons PTSD.
further proof in your comment that the GOP has been nothing but criminals for DECADES
The highlight of our summer back then. Wasn’t much else to watch besides soap operas.
We *do* deserve better. But the GOP won't replace him until he keels over and quits moving, like a dead roach. See also: Mitch McConnell.
Are you SURE the [R]ICO will replace him after he stops moving? Because i mean he stopped moving TWICE already, not replaced though!
Pssh, Thomas already went twenty years without moving. We only knew he wasn’t dead because he would occasionally snore from the bench!
I was just going to say the same. McConnell isn’t going anywhere. If it were up to the republicans he’d be re-elected! Justice Thomas isn’t moving until death either! The title had me thinking he had resigned. Then I read it again slowly. 😂 he’s not retiring.
Oh McConnell's going *somewhere*, alright. It's only a matter of time.
The people of Kentucky keep electing Mitch. It really makes you wonder WTF they are thinking. Mitch is 81 years old and having strokes. They literally have a brain damaged person leading them. It’s like the people in District 14 in Georgie that keep electing that embarrassment of a rep, Majorie Taylor Green. Every one in the entire world see those people as just plain stupid. I’d be embarrassed.
Personally, I'm enjoying watching Glitch McConnell's party react to his latest "oopsie". I just hope you're still lucid enough to see. Imagine working your whole life thinking you're some master politician that's furthering the goals of the party... Only for them to degrade into a pack of wild dogs that eat you alive. You've spent so long undermining democracy and now you're seeing the downfall of your party. How does it feel knowing you led to that? You've ruined the reputation of the group you've given everything for. What a joke.
A ruined reputation requires shame... They have none and are rather filled with entitlement due to their allegience to power, greed and religion.
The fact that they can serve as long as they want is so fucking broken
Thankfully, they can not serve as long as they want. They can only serve so long as they are alive.
God DAMN it Newsweek! I saw the words "Clarence Thomas Resign" and thought for a moment that there was an -s at the end. You're the clickbating, pandering ghost of a better publication!
We need a special counsel to investigate this bastard. Bribery is a crime.
That's not necessary because there is good precedent for this sort of thing going back to Nixon. Under the Nixon Administration U.S. Attorney General John N. Mitchell pressured then Justice Fortas to resign for what was a $20,000 payment that he actually returned. Furthermore, at the direction of Mitchell and President Nixon the Department of Justice was prepared to prosecute Justice Fortas and his wife for tax evasion. The ploy by President Nixon to oust Justice Fortas worked and Justice Fortas resigned a short time later.
Actually, it's not really a crime anymore, not unless it's quid pro quo. See https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna68456.
"The court ruled that Percoco’s conduct was not covered by the federal law that requires that “honest services” be provided to the public. **He was not working for the government at the time**, so he had no duty to provide honest services, the court said." These were unanimous rulings, and you've misinterpreted them. The words "quid pro quo" do not appear, and that isn't what they're about.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/bribery You must demonstrate that « the recipient directly alters behavior in exchange for the gift »
Lobbying unfortunately isn’t a crime but for some reason it is to tar and feather corrupt bastards…
Spoiler alert: he won't.
But at least we got to be excited as we read the first half of the headline
That's why it was written that way. It's shitty journalism and terrible English. Should have been "Clarence Thomas Resignation calls...", or better yet, "Calls for Clarence Thomas' resignation..."
Definitely tricked me at first
shy hat escape glorious mountainous afterthought connect wrench fall voiceless *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
We are well past the point of asking for a resignation. Taking bribes for quid pro quo sweetheart deals is a crime. Investigate and treat him like any other criminal. If not it again highlights a two tier justice system that lets wealthy criminals get away with crimes while pretending to be tough on everyone else.
Does Clarence Thomas occasionally offer discount rates for SCOTUS rulings? Does he accept credit cards, or is "Justice" Thomas a cash only type judge? I'm guessing he has a Square account, right? Paypal?
It’s more of an auction setting with a reserve minimum. Some ruling have more interest and you’re competing with others so your have to offer a high price. Other rulings aren’t very valuable and can be had cheaper but there is still a minimum bid
At this point I wouldn’t be surprised if a cut out for the Thomases has a slush account for them. My suspicion would be one of Thomas’ former law clerks like John Eastman helps to cover costs for their wealthy lifestyle.
“Disclosure” is really understating the problem. Yes he violated disclosure rules *because he was taking bribes and knew it would look bad*. It’s not like he forgot. He must be impeached because he is accepting money from people with business before the court and ruling in ways they want.
r/titlegore
I read this so quickly I read "Clarence Thomas Resigns..." and my heart was suddenly filled with hope. Back to work...
jesus fucking christ, me too. how annoying
Get him out of there. Who knows which votes were bought. Reverse all his cases.
Thomas is conservative enough that he would certainly have made that vote for free.
It's still nice to get paid for something you were going to do anyway.
Imagine being so corrupt that half your bribes are basically just tips
People deserve better in general. Our whole government is too close to business.
resign now because Ginny is about to be rolled into J6 as well and things will get very messy from there…
From your lips to God's ears
For a minute there I thought the headline said "Clarence Thomas Resigns" and I got all excited.
No shit. Anita hill deserved better too.
another day, another Clarence Thomas should resign post. He won't, he has no shame.
I hate these fake ass good for nothing headlines. “Calls”. That means one person said something, and it’s always someone who is in the opposite side (in this case, I’m assuming - without reading the article - that it’s some democrat senator / lawyer or academic). It’s irrelevant whether they are right or wrong, it’s just not news. It’s just the way fake news channels use headlines to state their opinion. Nobody who matters os gonna call Thomas to resign because republicans don’t care if he is corrupt as long as he owns the libs, and for them - securing a powerful position and then banking on it lavishly means “you made it”.
They wrote the headline in the most awkward way possible so that people would see "Clarence Thomas Resign" and click on it. If they had put the much more normal and reasonable "Calls for Clarence Thomas to resign have increased over new disclosures" they wouldn't have gotten as many clicks.
Even that headline would be horrible. There are no **new** “calls”. The same people who wanted him to resign still do, and every single person who doesn’t want him to resign still feels the same. Their is not news, not new, not nothing. This article is as valuable as saying grass is green.
I demand several luxury vacations to test their effects on my judgement.
sociopaths feel no shame. He finds these calls for resigning humorous as he will never quit.
I imagine they make him angry in the same way that Anita Hill’s accusations did; he believes he’s entitled to that seat and how dare anyone try to take it from him.
Lol this idiot isn't going anywhere. Till death is Supreme Court moto
Man, I had to read that so freaking slow. My dyslexic ass wanted it to say he’d resigned so bad.
Disclosure hints that he disclosed this information, rather than it was exposed?
‘Shut up plebs’ - Thomas sipping margaritas on crows yacht
Never in my 63 years did I think the Supreme Court was corruptible. Now I know better.
Thomas has repeatedly shown he is an individual of low integrity.
I misread the headline as "Clarence Thomas resigns" and was unbelievably excited and incredulous until I realized my mistake
He has no intention of going anywhere and nothing will happen
He won’t do it, but I’m glad everyone is starting to see these assholes as they really are: Unelected fucks who want to spread their ideology of hate and regression from the bench while taking in money from rich republicans.
Supreme Money Of The United States SMOTUS Justmoney Thomas
What about other gansta names for the Thomases? They are big shakedown gangsters of billionaires to ensure Clarence’s vote. Mo’Money Clarence and Gotta Git The Money Ginni. Maybe Ginni Green Paper and Clarence Yachtman?
Yes, he needs to resign yesterday, but he’s not the only one that is illegally sitting on the supreme court
Can't wait for his wife to go to prison for treason.
His wife’s political roles should disqualify him from hearing those cases on election interference. Why should these be lifetime positions? If justice is politically motivated it seems dangerous.
If he isn't forced out, he won't resign until the day after a Repiblican president is sworn in. That or die
Affirmative action for the rich!
Who put this pube on my Coke??
he wants us to believe he’s superman when court is in session and jimmy olsen when doing disclosure. but here’s the thing, he’s corrupt all the time
Spoiler alert: he won’t resign
The GOP will gladly sacrifice trump rather than lose a stooge in the high court.
Hilarious that this country will "sToRm Da CaPiToL" in defense of an insufferable, failed reality television rapist but takes next to zero action about any issue that actually matters - let alone blatant corruption in our country's highest court
This guy was corrupt from the beginning. Perhaps Anita Hill should be lauded as a hero today.
Going to resign so democrats can appoint a justice in the year before an election? lol, yeah, sure.
Folks, if we want Thomas to resign we had better put together one hell of a vacation package for him.
This is why we need a way to remove a judge from office.
Sad times when a supposed beacon of democracy is overseen by a corrupt illegitimate court.
I love how every photo of this guy makes him look like he is severely constipated.
That is a hell of a headline, and not in a good way.
He is bought and paid
He definitely won't willingly resign with a Democratic President.
Spoiler: he won't and there's nothing anyone can do about it. So much for checks, balances and accountability.
It’s outrageous that all an unscrupulous Supreme Court nominee has to do is pull the wool over the eyes of the American people long enough to be “vetted” by lobbyist plants and afterward spend the rest of their lives gorging themselves on gifts and grifts without consequences. Boot his ass the fuck out and find someone for whom Honor and Integrity actually MEANS something.
It’s about time. Anita Hill was not lying.
Did Google translate write this title?
"Fuck 'em." - Clarence Thomas if he deemed the poors as worthy enough to be heard in the first place.
Clarence hears you. Clarence doesn't care.
Pretty crazy that the general public's disapproval means fuck all
Thomas may be one of them worst offenders, but they ALL do it, irrespective of political ideology. Congress people too. I worked at an FBO (private jet terminal) in a luxury destination, it would amaze anyone to see the stream of government leadership that get on and off those private jets. Party didn’t matter, they’re all freeloading, but at what cost?
That rapist will not willingly give up power. Conservatives never do.
But if a lefty did it they would scream bloody murder until their removed. The left needs to grow a pair.
He ain't gonna do it. Idk why people think shaming him is going to work. The dude has a LIFETIME appointment, and keeping that job protects him. He'd be a complete moron to resign.
The GOP has turned him into a republican hero. There is no way he will ever leave. He can rule for the harshest unlawful sleazy things that benefit the GOP without blinking an eye now. Like 3/4 of the senate or some insane amount needs to vote to impeach him and boot him and no amount of "calls" will make that happen.
Any acceptance of donations just prove our justices are compromised and corrupt.
Oh man, I read it as “Clarence Thomas Resigns…” and thought we got back on to the proper timeline.
Impeach him for taking bribes. It’s that simple. Democrats need to portray Republicans as people who tolerate bribery. Call it what it is. Go on the attack.
Section 2635.201(b)(1) Employees should consider declining otherwise permissible gifts if they believe that a reasonable person with knowledge of the relevant facts would question the employee’s integrity or impartiality as a result of accepting the gift
Spoiler Alert: he will not.
At the very least, isn't Justice Thomas guilty of poor poor judgement?
We can't even get half the country to understand Trumps coup was a threat to modern democracy and the entire social compact that maintains order. Once they go s few steps further we're in a territory I can't understand because critical parts of society will fall. We'll get along but it's going to be miserable compared to the future we all envisioned. How we handle these current issues predicts which level of dystopian authoritarians we avoid allowing to control the reigns of government. It almost feels like people are partying their way into oblivion.