With The Latest Revelations About Clarence Thomas, What's The Over Under On "Weeks Until He Resigns in Disgrace"?

Wow, lefties are so desperate to steal the Supreme Court. Once they do, it will be a one-party country from here on out.
Stacking the court will certainly help but help is not needed. The left's agenda for securing a one-party country is well on its way with Biden's open border policy. All of these illegals and every one of their extended family members, who will be brought here, are guaranteed to vote socialist, liberal. We are talking about millions of future DEMONRAT votes. All may be already lost.
 
the new GOP and Clarence Thomas have absolutely no shame about anything. They will do or say anything to protect the low tax rates on the rich and end of

free flight and hotel when going to universities to give commencement addresses? That is fake news....
There is an appearance of impropriety when an unbiased and reasonable person who is aware of all relevant facts would doubt that the Justice could fairly discharge his or her duties. Except in unusual circumstances, no such appearance will be created when a Justice speaks before a group associated with an educational institution, a bar group, or a nonprofit group that does not regularly engage in advocacy or lobbying about issues that may be implicated in cases that come before the Court.
 
Stacking the court will certainly help but help is not needed. The left's agenda for securing a one-party country is well on its way with Biden's open border policy. All of these illegals and every one of their extended family members, who will be brought here, are guaranteed to vote socialist, liberal. We are talking about millions of future DEMONRAT votes. All may be already lost.

I really wish we would get there already so that they have no where to point fingers and have to own without question what their policies bring about. The only way stupid people will learn is through the pain of consequences, personal consequences.
 
The disclosure law saying 'dependent child'.....Martin wasn't his dependent child.


"Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children. The law’s definition of dependent child is narrow, however, and likely would not apply to Martin since Thomas was his legal guardian, not his parent. "
 
I don't know the over under on Thomas' resignation but the over under on the number of unstable liberals who will shit their pants just thinking about his resignation is around 400,000. This obsession with cancelling conservatives is starting to look more like insanity every day.
 
"Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children. The law’s definition of dependent child is narrow, however, and likely would not apply to Martin since Thomas was his legal guardian, not his parent. "
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.
Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children. The law’s definition of dependent child is narrow, however, and likely would not apply to Martin since Thomas was his legal guardian, not his parent. The best case for not disclosing Crow’s tuition payments would be to argue the gifts were to Martin, not Thomas, experts said.
But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child’s education.
“The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It’s common sense,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. “It’s all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas.”
 
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.
Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children. The law’s definition of dependent child is narrow, however, and likely would not apply to Martin since Thomas was his legal guardian, not his parent. The best case for not disclosing Crow’s tuition payments would be to argue the gifts were to Martin, not Thomas, experts said.
But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child’s education.
“The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It’s common sense,” said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. “It’s all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas.”
I'm amazed they actually needed to elaborate on that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top