Jeff Danziger for May 08, 2023

Gimme, gimme. Why does that sound familiar?

This guy was exposed as a shady character during his senate conformation hearings. So now we are surprised to find out that he is what he has always been?

Ok, I’m going to admit it, I am missing something here. Yeah, I get it, Clarence Thomas is a crooked judge.

But what is the image from? Why is his hand like that? And why is it glowing?

“Do you think I’d dirty my hands with a bribe? Just leave it with my wife.”

“Use the farce, Clarence!”

Don’t support them or vote for any of them with their hands open for bribes.

Backsheesh

While one hand is out looking for $$$, the other is reaching for the nearest woman. One of the sorriest excuses for a human being around.

He won’t be happy until things go back to where his interracial marriage is ruled illegal and they send him to Alabama to pick cotton. Then it will be “Wait, I didn’t mean ME”

Pretty soon we’ll find out that he also takes bribes from people who are NOT neo-Nazis…..

We’re proud to have the best Supreme Court justices money can buy!

I wonder of Mr Danziger was one of the Journalists, media contributors , that ignored Justice Sotomayor’s failureto recuse herself when the publishing company that paid her for book rights came up in a case before her – a definite no-no in the Rules of the Supreme Court.

His Arrogance Corrupt Clarence chooses what to disclose about gifts his dear friends lavish upon him solely ’cause he’s just a good ol’ guy who’d rather be at Wal-Mart, cuss it.

How about Sotamier ruling on a case were they paid her millions for her book

gee wish I had a sugar billionaire like Uncle Thomas has

Oh, I dunno. Money—possibly!

Another commenter pointed out that Sotomayor and Gorsuch received royalties from Penguin Random House for book deals, and that they failed to recuse themselves from cases involving that publisher. That comment has disappeared, but it IS pertinent to the case with Thomas. I think that the commenter was gigagrouch, and if I’m wrong I apologize for that mistake. I submitted the following response:

“Sotomayor and Gorsuch DID fail to recuse themselves from those cases; and like Breyer, they should have done so. However, Sotomayor and Gorsuch DID report their sizable royalty incomes from the book deals from Penguin Random House. I notice that [commenter] failed to point out that Thomas has reported NONE of the money, nor the value of the perks he has secretly received over the years from right-wing ideologues. Those were ideologues who have lavished more than 100 times as much dark money largess to right-wing political organizations than the two Justices earned in legitimate royalties.” Thomas also voted FOR “Citizens United”, the ruling which opened the flood gates to dark money contributions, AND his concurring opinion would have struck down ALL anonymous reporting requirements for secret contributions.

First there was Clarence the Cross-eyed Lion—now we have Clarence the allegedly guilty Lying’ judge.

You’ll notice one (1) of The Base excusing every ‘gift from a wealthy “friend”’ by claiming Sotomayor did it too. (Leaving out Gorsuch, of course)

Perfect,spot-on drawing of the money-hungry grubber!

Does he use dead drops, or just has the envelopes of cash slid across the table?

no sh!t

I would not say crooked as much as unethical, which is worse. But I think the hand is emphasized so the reader notices it.

Like he’d bother doing it behind his back. He would take the bribe on fifth avenue at high noon in front of news cameras and, like trump, not suffer a single consequence.

The “Flaw and Odor” party.

Aww c’mon Danziger …. you give the bribe to Ginni, she’s the Boss, she tells her boy what to do. Everybody knows that.

Hey! Just had an idea, if we offered trump a seat on the court, maybe he’d abandon running again?

Before you yell Not Qualified! what’s that got to do with anything?

He’s waving to Anita Hall.

I lose track of just where I post, so I may have posted this before here. But:

I do not believe, nor do I have any reason to believe, that the Thomases would act, believe, advocate, or decide (Clarence, judicially) in any way differently, if they had not benefited from the largess of their fans and friends. They are just terrible people with terrible beliefs, and they attract other terrible people as fans and friends.

Typical political or judicial “corruption” is usually taken to mean that someone—a politician, judge, government official, business executive, etc.—is led by a bribe to make some decision in favour of the briber that he or she would otherwise not make. I don’t believe that this is the case here. In fact, I am willing to believe that many politicians with terrible ideas and policies hold them sincerely, regardless of the support they get from others with those same ideas and policies. Here’s a mind experiment—does anyone think that many of them would change their policies and decisions if some liberal PAC would outbid the NRA or ALEC?

Unfortunately, there’s no way that public policy can be made to prevent terrible ideas (by which of course I mean ideas contrary to mine). However, there can be a set of rules—“ethics”—that can attack the “old-fashioned” idea of corruption I mention above. Ethics rules prevent the possibility of corruption by preventing—or at least exposing—payoffs of various types. And since we cannot read minds and know what politicians and judges and the like really believe, these rules also apply to payments and largess that may not actually be buying or altering a decision of some sort; we can’t know.

So: I personally believe that the Thomases, and a whole bunch of politicians and others with terrible ideas, are not actually “corrupt” in the classical sense or rewarding bribers. There is no question, however, that many of them are being very very unethical

Kinda puts the phrase “Your Honor” to the test, amiright?

“we don’t know the rules, and we don’t care, the rules are not for us”gee the Trumpoids didn’t invent that way of thinking