Sonia Sotomayor - Typical corrupt Lib

[Horseman 1,590]

Huge 150K senator salary.  

Huge book deals.  Quick, what was the name of his book again, no googling?    

[thegeneral 1,544]

11 minutes ago, Horseman said:

Huge 150K senator salary.  

Huge book deals.  Quick, what was the name of his book again, no googling?    

We already covered the Senators salary…that gets you to 2 mil…easy. Beyond that yeah being a VP for 8 years seems to be lucrative. Go figure!

I don’t know what his book is, zero interesting in reading about Joe Biden and Scranton

Did it make money for the publisher, who knows and personally DGAF. It’s their money. Mariners paid Jeff Cirillo like 40 million to kick the ball around and bat .230. 

So look bozo, when you have finished investigating Biden’s finances present your findings to the Feds. 

 

[Horseman 1,590]

7 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

I don’t know what his book is, zero interesting in reading about Joe Biden

Neither does anyone else.  18 million and counting!    

[thegeneral 1,544]

1 minute ago, Horseman said:

Neither does anyone else.  18 million and counting!    

Ol Joe who is senile who can’t chew his own food but has successfully hidden all his crooked deals from the GOP, the Feds, etc. He’s like Capone here

That is until you figured it out. 

[Horseman 1,590]

11 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Ol Joe who is senile who can’t chew his own food but has successfully hidden all his crooked deals from the GOP, the Feds, etc. He’s like Capone here

That is until you figured it out. 

There is nothing to figure out unless you're a retard.  

Sho Nuff will have to get the last post in, always, watch.

[thegeneral 1,544]

10 minutes ago, Horseman said:

There is nothing to figure out unless you're a retard.  

Sho Nuff will have to get the last post in, always, watch.

Only Whoresman and his 8 aliases have figured out The Biden Crime syndicates dealings. Delusional. What a sleuth!

Last post!!

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

Biden has been rich for a long time, before any post VP income. And it’s inexplicable. 

[Horseman 1,590]

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,715]

22 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Only Whoresman and his 8 aliases have figured out The Biden Crime syndicates dealings. Delusional. What a sleuth!

Last post!!

Well, c'mon.  Your blinders on this whole thing are ridiculous and absurd.

Like all good lefties, you're unwilling to believe that anyone on your side of the aisle is nothing less than an Angel sent from the heavens.  GTFO, respectfully.

[Reality 2,711]

23 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

Only Whoresman and his 8 aliases have figured out The Biden Crime syndicates dealings. Delusional. What a sleuth!

Last post!!

You've been here for about 15 minutes. How do you know about years worth of handles?

[Dizkneelande 851]

Imagine thinking it’s not news unless CNN reports on it. How do you all even give this piece of crap a forum rather than just ridicule every posts he makes. Guy sucks hard.

[thegeneral 1,544]

1 minute ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

Well, c'mon.  Your blinders on this whole thing are ridiculous and absurd.

Like all good lefties, you're unwilling to believe that anyone on your side of the aisle is nothing less than an Angel sent from the heavens.  GTFO, respectfully.

Yeah BS. This idea that Biden has somehow evaded being busted for whatever it is people have said in here…which is nothing, he signed a book deal!…is dumb. 

 

[jonnyutah 136]

A democrat probably dug that up. Then they can get her to resign. Replace her with a liberal. Then keep digging and pressuring conservative judges. 

They don't care about anything other than getting liberals on there. Even if they have to swap some. 

Then they can pretend they take the high road. 

[thegeneral 1,544]

9 minutes ago, Reality said:

You've been here for about 15 minutes. How do you know about years worth of handles?

It’s not too hard to figure out when they are posting the same personal crap and accidentally laughing at their own posts because they forgot to logout/login. 

Who knows. Having 10 aliases seems to be a thing on here.

[Voltaire 4,586]

8 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

You’re presenting dots without any connection. What makes the Daily Caller disreputable is that they attempt to connect those dots .

Her book was published in January 2013 and her publisher had a case before the court in April 2013.

Making a ruling on conflicts of interest regarding the hand that feeds you is precisely why judges use recusals in the first place. This situation is the definition of conflict of interst.

You have chosen to deliberately ignore the dots. Your given reasoning for doing so is because the only news you are willing consume, by your own admission, is that what has been selected and spoonfed to you by known partisan outlets. Even when the facts are laid before you clearly,  like in this case, you completely lack the ability to look at them and process the information for yourself. It's pitiful that you've allowed yourself to become a mindless programable automaton.

Every day, somebody in these newsrooms makes a deliberate choice as to what gets amplified and what gets buried and this is very extremely something that doesnt fit the agenda and gets buried. Corporate left media will do nothing - ever - to look into what they don't want looking into as per their agenda as in this case' meanwhile they'll blow to high heavens the story of Clarence Thomas hanging out with rich friends because that is what they care about.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

This pig didn’t recuse herself a decade ago and we are just hearing about it now? 

[thegeneral 1,544]

1 minute ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

This pig didn’t recuse herself a decade ago and we are just hearing about it now? 

You are only hearing about this now because red tie team is doing whatabout game due to Clarence getting popped.

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,715]

17 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

You are only hearing about this now because red tie team is doing whatabout game due to Clarence getting popped.

You just hate it when your own strategy is used against one of yours.  Don't pull shiat like that in the first place and then it won't come back to bite YOU in the @ss.

[thegeneral 1,544]

4 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

You just hate it when your own strategy is used against one of yours.  Don't pull shiat like that in the first place and then it won't come back to bite YOU in the @ss.

I was answering the question with my thoughts…which seems pretty obvious to me.

If she did something wrong by all means have at it. I think the SC justices should have some new rules added, or at the very least have the debate and discussion.

Lifetime appointments should be gone. Two maxed picked per 4 year term are a couple items I think worth looking at.

.

[Mike Honcho 4,141]

13 hours ago, Strike said:

I don't believe your understanding of the Thomas case is accurate.  There is a thread on that case.  If you want to discuss him go to that thread and bump it.  In the meantime, do you find it even slightly interesting that Breyer recused himself from cases from the same publisher after receiving much less money than Sotomayor but she didn't feel obligated to do the same? 

I'm well aware of the facts of the Thomas case and since your link compared the too, asking why you are concerned about the ethics of one judge and not the other is justified. 

AS to finding it slightly interesting, I find it more than slightly interesting, I think all the judges should recuse themselves from any case where a conflict of interest is brought before them. But that's not the rules for the Supreme Court. Off the top of my head I can think of many other such instances and not once did I see you start a thread accusing those judges of being corrupt. 

Judicial reform on the supreme court is a very serious issue and I'm all for a discussion about that, but it's hard to take it seriously in what is clearly a "whataboutism" thread. 

[crackattack 513]

20 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

If this was a real story it would be reported in the New York Times, the Washington Post, and CNN. Until that happens it’s a waste of time to discuss. 

This better? Also hits Judge Gorsuch. 

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/politics/sonia-sotomayor-neil-gorsuch-book-recusal-supreme-court-cases/index.html

[TBayXXXVII 2,197]

15 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Give me a Fockin break. People really try to say Biden earned it over the course of his life. Lol.  GTFO.  How dumb can these idiots be? 

It's funny that he doesn't think that the people who actually write laws/bills on what can and cannot be taxed, what has to and doesn't have to be declared, and direct input on taxation, doesn't know how to hide money.

To note, I think EVERY politician has money they're not telling the country about.  A LOT of money.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

12 minutes ago, TBayXXXVII said:

It's funny that he doesn't think that the people who actually write laws/bills on what can and cannot be taxed, what has to and doesn't have to be declared, and direct input on taxation, doesn't know how to hide money.

To note, I think EVERY politician has money they're not telling the country about.  A LOT of money.

Getting elected to congress is the greatest scholarship ever. 

[Strike 4,092]

2 hours ago, Mike Honcho said:

I'm well aware of the facts of the Thomas case and since your link compared the too, asking why you are concerned about the ethics of one judge and not the other is justified. 

AS to finding it slightly interesting, I find it more than slightly interesting, I think all the judges should recuse themselves from any case where a conflict of interest is brought before them. But that's not the rules for the Supreme Court. Off the top of my head I can think of many other such instances and not once did I see you start a thread accusing those judges of being corrupt. 

Judicial reform on the supreme court is a very serious issue and I'm all for a discussion about that, but it's hard to take it seriously in what is clearly a "whataboutism" thread. 

AFAIK Thomas never had cases before him involving his buddy he vacationed with.  If you've got evidence to the contrary post it in the Thomas thread.  As far as me not starting threads about other conflicts, apparently I don't follow the SC as much as you do.  I will say that I highly doubt your claim that you can "think of many other such instances."  That implies that right off the top of your head you've got a list of SC cases where a justice had a conflict.  Even if you've read of a bunch of other cases I find it hard to believe you've got those memorized and can just post them off the top of your head.  But it's not something I waste time researching myself.  I saw this one and found it interesting given the recent stories about Thomas AND the fact that Breyer recused himself from these cases.  It seems obvious that they both should have. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

Another libtard scheme has backfired.  This will now fade away, as usual.  

[thegeneral 1,544]

39 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Another libtard scheme has backfired.  This will now fade away, as usual.  

Why should it do that?

[Mike Honcho 4,141]

3 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Another libtard scheme has backfired.  This will now fade away, as usual.  

The right put out this story about Sotomayor being corrupt and it turns out that Gorsuch did the same thing.  It will fade away cause this is a complete  moment for those who thought this was a "Gotcha"

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

She’s gross. 

[dogcows 1,029]

34 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

The right put out this story about Sotomayor being corrupt and it turns out that Gorsuch did the same thing.  It will fade away cause this is a complete  moment for those who thought this was a "Gotcha"

Exactly. We can debate whether justices should recuse themselves in cases like this, but there’s nothing illegal about it. Considering there are very few book publishers, and most justices have published books, the alternative would be that none of them can rule on such cases? 

Meanwhile, it’s a new day, and there is new information exposed about money secretly going to the Thomas family from people with cases before the court!

https://wapo.st/3LZ2Bsl

Quote

Conservative judicial activist Leonard Leo arranged for the wife of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to be paid tens of thousands of dollars for consulting work just over a decade ago, specifying that her name be left off billing paperwork, according to documents reviewed by The Washington Post.

In January 2012, Leo instructed the GOP pollster Kellyanne Conway to bill a nonprofit group he advises and use that money to pay Virginia “Ginni” Thomas, the documents show. The same year, the nonprofit, the Judicial Education Project, filed a brief to the Supreme Court in a landmark voting rights case.

Leo, a key figure in a network of nonprofits that has worked to support the nominations of conservative judges, told Conway that he wanted her to “give” Ginni Thomas “another $25K,” the documents show. He emphasized that the paperwork should have “No mention of Ginni, of course.”

Leonard Leo: "Whatever you do, don’t mention that we’re giving ANOTHER $25,000 to Ginni Thomas!" Clarence should resign immediately.

[jerryskids 5,401]

3 hours ago, thegeneral said:

Why should it do that?

The MSM would like to pressure conservative justices to retire while Team Biden can name the replacement; likely another intersectional person who will just vote for whatever progressive cause du jour crosses their path.  But since Sotomayor has been shown to have done an even more egregious breach of ethics, it will probably fade into the background, like Trump's Crime of the Century, Opus 237:  the confidential docs he planned to give to Xi and Putin.  

[thegeneral 1,544]

47 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

She’s gross. 

What’s your view on Clarence? Not like you’ll ever answer.

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

3 minutes ago, thegeneral said:

What’s your view on Clarence? Not like you’ll ever answer.

I won’t answer you. I don’t find you  interesting, knowledgeable or unique.  Just a garden variety Liberal troll. I’m all booked on that front. Troll on, troll. 

[thegeneral 1,544]

22 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

The MSM would like to pressure conservative justices to retire while Team Biden can name the replacement; likely another intersectional person who will just vote for whatever progressive cause du jour crosses their path.  But since Sotomayor has been shown to have done an even more egregious breach of ethics, it will probably fade into the background, like Trump's Crime of the Century, Opus 237:  the confidential docs he planned to give to Xi and Putin.  

All the actions of SC justices should be looked at, no? 

[thegeneral 1,544]

16 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I won’t answer you. I don’t find you  interesting, knowledgeable or unique.  Just a garden variety Liberal troll. I’m all booked on that front. Troll on, troll. 

I will troll for sure. Dopes who call all libs (or all Conservatives) retards or whatever other fuckery some nitwits use on this special little place are kind of hard to take seriously so sure why not. I hope for their sakes it is some weird schtick TBH.

If you consider yourself in that ilk, ok.

That you won’t talk about Clarence issues and only seem to be worried about the lib justice is kind of a red flag so that is why I asked. 

[Mike Honcho 4,141]

48 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

 Troll on, troll on. 

<Joe Perry Guitar Solo> 

[dogcows 1,029]

50 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

The MSM would like to pressure conservative justices to retire while Team Biden can name the replacement; likely another intersectional person who will just vote for whatever progressive cause du jour crosses their path.  But since Sotomayor has been shown to have done an even more egregious breach of ethics, it will probably fade into the background, like Trump's Crime of the Century, Opus 237:  the confidential docs he planned to give to Xi and Putin.  

Sotomayor's "breach of ethics" was more egregious? LOL

You know Gorsuch also used the same publisher and didn’t recuse himself either... right? And that the decision to recuse is left to each justice to make on their own?

Unlike Clarence T., they actually filled out their financial disclosure forms accurately, which is why we know about this.

I guess getting free rent for mom for life and free private school for adopted kids without reporting it is fine, but failing to recuse oneself on one case (that wasn’t even heard, the decision was just whether or not to take the case) is worse?

Meanwhile, in addition to all the financial impropriety of Thomas, he failed to recuse himself from cases involving Harlan Crow and his wife. Sure, that’s his prerogative (as it was hers), but one shouldn’t attack Sotomayor and fail to mention Thomas’ failure to recuse himself when conflicts of interest arose.

You might see this as some zero-sum game because Thomas is conservative. But his ethics breaches are truly heinous.

[jerryskids 5,401]

11 minutes ago, dogcows said:

Sotomayor's "breach of ethics" was more egregious? LOL

You know Gorsuch also used the same publisher and didn’t recuse himself either... right? And that the decision to recuse is left to each justice to make on their own?

Unlike Clarence T., they actually filled out their financial disclosure forms accurately, which is why we know about this.

I guess getting free rent for mom for life and free private school for adopted kids without reporting it is fine, but failing to recuse oneself on one case (that wasn’t even heard, the decision was just whether or not to take the case) is worse?

Meanwhile, in addition to all the financial impropriety of Thomas, he failed to recuse himself from cases involving Harlan Crow and his wife. Sure, that’s his prerogative (as it was hers), but one shouldn’t attack Sotomayor and fail to mention Thomas’ failure to recuse himself when conflicts of interest arose.

You might see this as some zero-sum game because Thomas is conservative. But his ethics breaches are truly heinous.

Do you have a list of cases that benefited Crow for which Thomas did not recuse himself?

Also that evil Thomas spent years of his life raising a grand nephew (great grand?) and trying to give him a good life, and this is what the MSM and you screaming blue hairs focus on.  I guess he should have just tossed the kid into the system you think can raise kids better than family.

And if we're keeping score, it's Sotomayor 3, Gorsuch 1, and Sotomayor millions, Gorsuch 100 thousands, on recusals:

Quote

In two separate copyright infringement cases concerning the publishing conglomerate Penguin Random House, the high court declined to take up the appeals, with the court saying in 2013 that it wouldn’t hear the first case, and the second case being turned away from the court in 2019 and again in 2020. In both cases, the publisher won at the lower court level, and those decisions stood.

Liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who joined the court in 2009 and has been paid millions of dollars from the publisher over the years, declined to recuse herself in all three instances.

Conservative Justice Neil Gorsuch, who joined the court in 2017 and also has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in book deals with the publisher, declined to disqualify himself from the more recent case when it came before the court for consideration.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/politics/sonia-sotomayor-neil-gorsuch-book-recusal-supreme-court-cases/index.html

We can argue which is worse; frankly I think they are all bad to varying degrees and we should discuss some improved checks and balance on this stuff.  

But my main point was that the MSM was hoping to put the screws on Thomas, but then this Sotomayor thing came out so now they can't.  They'll publish a few things about improving ethics in general while they look for the next gotcha on a conservative justice.

[Mike Honcho 4,141]

6 minutes ago, jerryskids said:

Do you have a list of cases that benefited Crow for which Thomas did not recuse himself?

Also that evil Thomas spent years of his life raising a grand nephew (great grand?) and trying to give him a good life, and this is what the MSM and you screaming blue hairs focus on.  I guess he should have just tossed the kid into the system you think can raise kids better than family.

And if we're keeping score, it's Sotomayor 3, Gorsuch 1, and Sotomayor millions, Gorsuch 100 thousands, on recusals:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/04/politics/sonia-sotomayor-neil-gorsuch-book-recusal-supreme-court-cases/index.html

We can argue which is worse; frankly I think they are all bad to varying degrees and we should discuss some improved checks and balance on this stuff.  

But my main point was that the MSM was hoping to put the screws on Thomas, but then this Sotomayor thing came out so now they can't.  They'll publish a few things about improving ethics in general while they look for the next gotcha on a conservative justice.

Trying to give him a good life = billionaire friend spending 150K on his private school education.  I wouldn't call that trying, but succeeding very well. But nothing out of the norm there. 

[jerryskids 5,401]

2 minutes ago, Mike Honcho said:

Trying to give him a good life = billionaire friend spending 150K on his private school education.  I wouldn't call that trying, but succeeding very well. But nothing out of the norm there. 

Yeah that's all he did for the kid, didn't otherwise raise him for years.    

[Hardcore troubadour 12,937]

Let it go libtards. It’s over.