Clarence Thomas Took Free Yacht Trip to Russia, Chopper Flight to Putin's Hometown

[RandySF]

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas has been accused of not disclosing a yacht trip to Russia and a private helicopter flight to a palace in President Vladimir Putin’s hometown, among a slew of other gifts and loans from businessman Harlan Crow.

Buried on page 14 of a letter that two Democratic senators sent to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Tuesday, in which they urged Garland to appoint a special counsel to probe Thomas, was an astonishing list of dozens of “likely undisclosed gifts and income” from Crow, Crow’s affiliated companies, and “other donors.”

In the letter, Sens. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) and Ron Wyden (D-OR) said Thomas, one of the court’s staunchly conservative justices, even may have committed tax fraud and violated other federal laws by “secretly” accepting the gifts and income potentially worth millions.

“The Senate is not a prosecutorial body, and the Supreme Court has no fact-finding function of its own, making the executive role all the more important if there is ever to be any complete determination of the facts,” reads the letter requesting the appointment of a special prosecutor.

“We do not make this request lightly,” said the letter.


https://www.thedailybeast.com/clarence-thomas-accepted-yacht-trip-to-russia-chopper-flight-to-putins-hometown-democrats

[marble falls]

1. He wanted to meet "the Boss".

[flying_wahini]

2. Then maybe Joe needs to meet with him, too.

Like they don’t already know exactly where he went and who he met.

[Think. Again.]

5. The subprime court says Joe could do a lot more than just meet with him.

[Think. Again.]

3. Isn't garland's inbox referred to as "the round file"?

[spanone]

4. SCOTUS are the only untouchables on earth

Zero ethics and Zero accountability

[Think. Again.]

7. Not true..

They, themselves, removed any deterence from the President doing what he feels is necessary to fulfill his Oath of Office and to protect our republic from "enemies, foreign or domestic"

[moniss]

14. Also even if they were to be impeached

they are the sole arbiters of whether the impeachment was done in compliance with the Constitution. Even if you dotted every i and crossed every t they could claim you didn't. Then it sets up the standoff. Do you declare an emergency and send in the US Marshals to physically remove them? Now how do you possibly hold hearings to replace them without a pitched fight with the other side? We are in a horrible mess with this MAGA majority on the court.

[Think. Again.]

16. You may have misunderstood my post....

They have given the President the power to do whatever is needed to remove them if he believes it is necessary.

And by "whatever is needed to remove them", I mean "whatever is needed to remove them".

By their own decision, that could be any act, such as an act that would eliminate them from the U.S., or from the planet if he deems it necessary.

[moniss]

18. No I do know what you mean

but my thoughts were relative to the idea of some impeachment process through the Congress and then the consequences of the MAGA majority on the court coming up with some "novel" decision that the impeachment process was flawed. I have no doubt whatsoever that if Joe or any future Dem President goes deep on that newly declared immunity this MAGA majority on the SC will suddenly find the "novel" reasoning to reign it all back in. But they won't for a GQP President.

It's kind of like how in the various MAGA states when a Dem gets elected governor. Before he takes office the GQP legislature passes laws stripping various powers of the governor and placing restrictions where they can. Then when one of their own get back in they go back to the governor having the call again.

Here in Wisconsin our laws say that people appointed to positions on various bodies can serve past their term until their replacement is confirmed. It was expected that things would move forward in the confirmation process and so we might look at an extension of a month or so at most. But the GQP legislature has just refused to confirm anybody for several positions and it has lasted years.

The problem we generally face right now is that the Constitution and really all of democracy depends on the idea that their will be checks and balances and also that officials will function in reasonably good faith but we now have had decades of that not being the case. We have people who view their entire purpose as grinding the functioning of government/democracy to a halt and breaking the ability to function wherever and however they can.

[Think. Again.]

19. I absolutely agree with everything you say...

...and I firmly believe the immunity ruling must be overturned for a lot of reasons.

What I am trying say is that the President is no lnger bound by our laws when it comes to performing his duties as President.

The SC clearly stated their reasoning for that ruling was that a President must not feel restricited by our laws to perform his duties.

So, the President is now fully empowered to commit any act, including those clearly ascribed as being illegal.

If the President also believes as we do that the checks and balances assured by the Constitution are being set aside by justices on the supreme court, it would be within his official obligations to protect those Constitutional standards by using any means at his disposal, which now includes any means that are listed as illegal.

There are quite a few illegal acts the President is now free to commit in order to vacate any number of seats on the supreme courts, and he is fully entitled to commit those acts without fear of prosecution.

[moniss]

20. I agree but I don't think Joe

would do that. The forces arrayed against us internationally would like nothing more than a pitched brawl between the branches of the US government. I don't think Joe would take the bait because although he could arguably remove every MAGA justice tomorrow with an emergency declaration the country would explode and our international foes would wring their hands in glee.

I agree with you completely that the SC decision lays open really any act as being possible but I think the MAGA SC saw an opportunity to help the Orange Ruski while at the same time opening the situation where if a Dem President takes a deep step in that direction it sets the stage for the MAGA crowd to scream "dictator" while not seeing one bit of irony. A typical feature of MAGA/GQP is to not be bothered in the least by irony or hypocrisy. They simply deny that the situations presented to them pose either one of those things. Then they continue on with more lies and propaganda on whatever is their next subject.

It's like their whole "doubling down" strategy for things where they never admit they lied it's always something like "poor choice of words" or "my words were misunderstood" etc. The societal institutions that we depend upon to deal with chronic liars, such as the press/media, have been badly compromised and are now a tool for the offenders to use. Similarly we see the degree to which our courts and governmental apparatus has been compromised for the service of these liars.

I agree it would be sweet revenge for Joe to stick their ruling up their backside but I'm concerned about the tangential effects. I know we may not have much of a democracy if the Orange Ruski were to win and maybe that calls the urgency of making a decision in the next months but I don't see it happening during the campaign.

I do speculate that if the Orange Ruski were to win that Cash and Carry Clarence will step down and he will be given the "pardon for all acts" and then his replacement will be somebody like an Alito type.

[Think. Again.]

21. Again, I agree with you...

...but I hope we won't be too concerned about Presidential ethics if it comes to stopping a second, probably much more-prepared and organized insurrection/coup attempt.

If it comes down to literally saving our Democracy at the last minute, this immunity ruling (which MUST be overturned) might be our saving grace.

[Sanity Claws]

6. Won't attend the State of the Union by Biden

but will take a long trip to visit Putin.

Tells you a lot.

[gab13by13]

8. No quid pro quo at the SOTU.

[OMGWTF]

13. Remember those Rethugs who went to Moscow July 4, 2018? WTF was that all about?

Annual reviews with the boss?

[PuraVidaDreamin]

9. Where's Clarence this summer and who is paying for it?

The people want to know

[diva77]

15. 'Tis the season for the Bohemian Grove

article about it from 2023:

https://sfist.com/2023/07/25/infamous-secretive-all-male-bohemian-grove-retreat-now-underway-in-sonoma-county/

[markodochartaigh]

10. Clearance Thomas,

Buy all the justice that you can afford! No job too large! Have gavel, will travel!


*Not available to huddled masses or those yearning to be free.

[Evolve Dammit]

11. Utter bullshit. What a fucking piece of crap. Anita Hill was right.

[orangecrush]

12. Is this real?

Holy shit


Guess this explains a lot about the immunity ruling.

[Igel]

17. Why not?

Petersburg is worth seeing.

The Hermitage. Admiralty tower. I liked the lions over the Neva--remembering how the ran in the storm as Petersburg flooded in Onegin's dream (in Pushkin's novel in verse).

Then there's Red Square. There is, or was, Gostinnyi dvor (Petersburg's GUM.)

Day trip to Pushkino and the Tsar's Village, Tsar'skoe tselo and its Amber Room. Or to Petershof and its fountains--Catherine vs Peter.

I was there in '91. Didn't run into Putin.