PDA

View Full Version : Supreme Conflict


domenick2x
07-07-2010, 07:04 AM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39426.html

Secret donors make Thomas's wife's group a tea party player

When Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’s wife announced in 2008 that she was going to help run Washington operations for a Michigan college once described as “a citadel of American conservatism,” she said the move was her “way of pulling away from politics” and the “safest place for me to be when it comes to conflicts” with her husband’s position on the court.

But, less than two years later, Virginia “Ginni” Thomas has returned to partisan politics as a fully engaged opponent of President Barack Obama, whom she has described as “hard left” and steering the nation “for tyranny.” As founder and president of a think tank and advocacy group called Liberty Central, she quickly established herself in the tea party movement by drawing on her longstanding ties to Washington’s conservative establishment and by landing two big donations — one for $500,000 and another for $50,000 —that put her group on the map.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39426.html#ixzz0szdJkMk8


Now, a couple of things (from later in the article):

Mrs. Thomas has vetted her group with the Supreme Court legal office, and they cleared her.

It is unknown whether Justice Thomas knows who the two donors are to his wife's group.




So, the question is this - SHOULD we expect a situation like this to have full disclosure - and this would apply to all spouses of all major elected officials - or are we okay with a presumption of 'not knowing' if Justice Thomas knows (if he does, would he even recuse himself)?

For the far right, if Ginsberg or another Lefty Justice were in the situation, what would you think is the best course?

FatDumbOxycontinAbuser
07-07-2010, 07:50 AM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39426.html

Secret donors make Thomas's wife's group a tea party player



Now, a couple of things (from later in the article):

Mrs. Thomas has vetted her group with the Supreme Court legal office, and they cleared her.

It is unknown whether Justice Thomas knows who the two donors are to his wife's group.




So, the question is this - SHOULD we expect a situation like this to have full disclosure - and this would apply to all spouses of all major elected officials - or are we okay with a presumption of 'not knowing' if Justice Thomas knows (if he does, would he even recuse himself)?

For the far right, if Ginsberg or another Lefty Justice were in the situation, what would you think is the best course?


It would be an outrage and unacceptable.

In this situation however, it is perfectly fine.

KinjaKahn
07-07-2010, 01:01 PM
It would be an outrage and unacceptable.

In this situation however, it is perfectly fine.Translation: whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa whaaaaaaaaaaaaa whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aa get a noose!

Vegas
07-07-2010, 01:05 PM
There hasn't been enough attention paid to family favors. Tom Daschle's wife was a highly paid prominent lobbyist and he disclosed nothing, for instance. Bob Dole was a highly paid prominent lobbyist while his wife was a senator. Same thing.l

A supreme court justice should recuse themself from any case with the appearance of impropriety.

Iron Jaw
07-08-2010, 03:22 AM
The Supremes did engage in a bit of conflict amongst themselves every now and then.

Jesse Helms' Ghost
07-08-2010, 03:56 AM
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0710/39426.html

Secret donors make Thomas's wife's group a tea party player



Now, a couple of things (from later in the article):

Mrs. Thomas has vetted her group with the Supreme Court legal office, and they cleared her.

It is unknown whether Justice Thomas knows who the two donors are to his wife's group.




So, the question is this - SHOULD we expect a situation like this to have full disclosure - and this would apply to all spouses of all major elected officials - or are we okay with a presumption of 'not knowing' if Justice Thomas knows (if he does, would he even recuse himself)?

For the far right, if Ginsberg or another Lefty Justice were in the situation, what would you think is the best course? I thought this was the 'Think Tank' and not the 'I tanked' thread???

Yes, Ginsberg was in that position. Her husband *was* a lawyer- complete with his own opinions on several legal issues.

FFS, just because the article uses the words 'think tank' doesn't mean this *is* a 'Think Tank' issue for this board. Sh1t, it's more of a whiny-ass one veiled like a turd masquerading as a donut with powdered sugar.

Fundraising isn't banned for the spouses of Justices on the Supreme Court..and the friggin SCOTUS already ruled on fundraising with regard to it being Free Speech.
:rolleyes: