Latest Breaking News

dchill

(42,660 posts)

20. Ethics being what they are...

Reply to Polybius (Original post)

Sat Apr 22, 2023, 08:04 PM

Apr 2023

"ethics guidelines in effect at the time had not required such disclosures."

Supreme Court, substandard ethics.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

54 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Chief Justice John Roberts punts on request to investigate Clarence Thomas [View all] Polybius Apr 2023 OP

Birds of a feather stick together? Evolve Dammit Apr 2023 #1

I was gonna say Quanto Magnus Apr 2023 #18

"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men"? The Shadow knows. (old TV, but applicable)..nt Evolve Dammit Apr 2023 #24

And then Quanto Magnus May 2023 #54

Whose pockets have been generous to the Chief Justice? marble falls Apr 2023 #2

That's the first... 2naSalit Apr 2023 #14

Good question ck4829 Apr 2023 #50

What about the real estate deal? Shouldn't that have been reported, Johnny? mobeau69 Apr 2023 #3

Hard to be certain, despite the reporting on the subject FBaggins Apr 2023 #7

He listed a 1/3 interest on his 2014 disclosure form as a rental property, not a personal residence. pnwmom Apr 2023 #27

Who is paying for Roberts vacations or his mother's house ? ...nt Jarqui Apr 2023 #4

Who's paying Roberts' wife? SunSeeker Apr 2023 #32

Stunning, sure does raise suspicions of what's going on with Roberts now, too bucolic_frolic Apr 2023 #5

Unprofessional Chicken Shit. Cha Apr 2023 #6

Truly ck4829 Apr 2023 #49

Of course he does Marthe48 Apr 2023 #8

no matter Layzeebeaver Apr 2023 #9

Unsurprising. (nt) Paladin Apr 2023 #10

Roberts needs to have Thomas Turbineguy Apr 2023 #11

He messed up his own legacy long ago. dchill Apr 2023 #21

Who is surprised by this? LetMyPeopleVote Apr 2023 #12

I'd like to know what the law was when he left them out. jimfields33 Apr 2023 #13

Same here .... anciano Apr 2023 #16

Why do you think Dick Durbin is incompetent? ... marble falls Apr 2023 #35

Got any more doubts about Dick Durbin? marble falls Apr 2023 #52

Colour me sooooooo NOT surprised. niyad Apr 2023 #15

More than a little disingenuous, isn't he? madamesilverspurs Apr 2023 #17

what crap! (not the op -- i mean john roberts crap) i googled the judicial conference committee orleans Apr 2023 #19

Good info, thanks! BigmanPigman Apr 2023 #26

Ethics being what they are... dchill Apr 2023 #20

The Substandard Court. ck4829 Apr 2023 #48

Robert's wife is a crook .... Whose surprised? LenaBaby61 Apr 2023 #22

Message auto-removed Name removed Apr 2023 #25

She has made millions in commissions from companies with cases before her husband's court. NullTuples Apr 2023 #37

this is not surprising republianmushroom Apr 2023 #23

Politicians in robes PSPS Apr 2023 #28

Imagine Johnny's deal if Clearance cashing in like that. czarjak Apr 2023 #29

As Gomer Pyle used to say... surprise, surprise, surprise!! InAbLuEsTaTe Apr 2023 #30

Thomas should not need any 3rd party guidelines to behave ethically. cstanleytech Apr 2023 #31

What investigative powers does the Judicial Conference have? SunSeeker Apr 2023 #33

There is no question left as to the bias exhibited by the SCOTUS SouthernDem4ever Apr 2023 #34

Indeed ck4829 Apr 2023 #47

Isn't Roberts also the presiding officer of the Judicial Conference? NullTuples Apr 2023 #36

Impeach, Impeach, Impeach!!! hydrolastic Apr 2023 #38

Did you learn nothing from the TFG impeachments ExWhoDoesntCare Apr 2023 #40

do you understand the mechanics of ... RussBLib Apr 2023 #41

Just send Roberts a subpoena Bluejeans Apr 2023 #39

Yep ck4829 Apr 2023 #46

You'd think a guy who claims the SCOTUS should be seen above Hassler Apr 2023 #42

You'd think a guy who claims the SCOTUS should be seen above Hassler Apr 2023 #43

Right? ck4829 Apr 2023 #45

Weak ck4829 Apr 2023 #44

Just-Us Droid Kid Berwyn Apr 2023 #51

I would say that Justice Roberts' melm00se Apr 2023 #53