Justice Thomas CAUGHT in MILLION DOLLAR Criminal Fraud

CANON_Grow said:

Billionaires will do billionaire things, and not understanding/caring about optics is a luxury they can afford. That being said, did Harlan Crow actually break any laws or rules that apply to him? We know Clarence did and he should be removed because of how egregious his behaviour has been, but that's on Clarence not Harlan.

Click to expand...

Corruption exists because there is a buyer and a seller. Both have an equal contribution as you can’t have one without the other.

cannabineer said:

Hard to say. These guys lie as naturally as the rest of us breathe.

It’s like dealing with forum trolls: the effort needed to address their obvious bulgogi is an order of magnitude greater than they put into the deception in the first place.

So while I think it’s a foregone conclusion that he did, proving it to court standards is an uphill slog.

Trollocracy.

Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to troll so hope it wasn't taken that way. Before I posted I had a quick look at who is required to register as a lobbyist and couldn't find anything in regards to justices, and the term lobbyist doesn't seem to apply to someone in Harlan Crow's position as he wouldn't be an intermediary. It certainly stinks of malfeasance but I couldn't find a rule that states that it's not allowed.

CunningCanuk said:

Corruption exists because there is a buyer and a seller. Both have an equal contribution as you can’t have one without the other.

Click to expand...

I agree with your statement, but it appears what Harlan did is allowed - the problem is Clarence didn't disclose it. I am not supporting how the system is setup, it's certainly not good, but immoral ≠ illegal or against the rules, unfortunately.

CANON_Grow said:

I wasn't trying to troll so hope it wasn't taken that way. Before I posted I had a quick look at who is required to register as a lobbyist and couldn't find anything in regards to justices, and the term lobbyist doesn't seem to apply to someone in Harlan Crow's position as he wouldn't be an intermediary. It certainly stinks of malfeasance but I couldn't find a rule that states that it's not allowed.

Click to expand...

Oh no; the trolls are the rich and their pet powerful messing with the rest of us, primarily “because they can”. Nothing at you.

CANON_Grow said:

I agree with your statement, but it appears what Harlan did is allowed - the problem is Clarence didn't disclose it. I am not supporting how the system is setup, it's certainly not good, but immoral ≠ illegal or against the rules, unfortunately.

Click to expand...

As I see it, the non disclosure aspect was both immoral and against the rules.

CunningCanuk said:

As I see it, the non disclosure aspect was both immoral and against the rules.

Click to expand...

For Clarence Thomas, I agree and it appears he broke the law. Harlan Crow is in a different situation, the only disclosure he MAY have been obligated to do was the gift tax to the IRS(that we're unlikely to ever know if he did). Even the gift tax is not clear though in regards to the yacht and private jet. Not arguing with the thought that it is wrong or should be illegal, just genuinely curious how something with an impact as big as this can be so easily corrupted and appears to be fully legal.

"Let me frame this out by presenting two different factual scenarios.

If I buy my friend a first-class $50,000 plane ticket, it's a gift, right? I would arguably report $33,000 or the amount that exceeds the $17,000 annual exclusion. So we have a $33,000 reported gift.

If I allow my friend to use my yacht or private jet, it's different from buying a commercial airline ticket. I think that professor Crawford and I are really digging into why and how it's different. As long as they're traveling with me on the jet or the yacht, there is no additional cost for them to be on the yacht or the private jet. I'm going to be using my plane whether they're there or not."

Elon will be offering them free trips to space once he sees how easy they are to own.

CANON_Grow said:

I agree with your statement, but it appears what Harlan did is allowed - the problem is Clarence didn't disclose it. I am not supporting how the system is setup, it's certainly not good, but immoral ≠ illegal or against the rules, unfortunately.

Click to expand...

Bribery is a crime.

Offmymeds said:

Bribery is a crime.

Click to expand...

Proving it is the problem. I'm sure former judge Garland is disgusted with Thomas and if he can make a case... Thomas needs to be impeached, but the GOP is so corrupt they can't even function as a government, but as a clown show instead. If the democrats win in 24 he, his wife, Harland and a few other billionaires will be on the hotseat under oath, he will face a very uncomfortable public impeachment investigation or resign first. He might be gone before then as more corruption scandals emerge, Clarence should "retire" from the bench and make it go away, or if the republicans win in 24 they will make it go away and more.

Zero integrity plus a lifetime appointment equals Clarence giving anyone who disagrees with his behavior a big middle finger.
He is not going anywhere-