Justice for Hire - SCOTUS

It appears Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas may be in some hot water for failing to disclose multiple high dollar gifts and trips financed by Republican mega donor Harlan Crow. The ethics requirements of reporting are clear, public officials whether serving a term or a lifetime appointment must be free of bias, be immune to bribery, and report gifts in excess of $415 dollars. All of which Justice Thomas appears to have failed at.

The incongruity of high ranking Republicans who openly flaunt their big monies ties, while painting a picture of New York State judges being influenced by billionaire George Soros is yet another hypocrisy heaped upon the Right.

Quote:

---

Clarence Thomas and the Billionaire

IN LATE JUNE 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef.

If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too.

---

https://www.propublica.org/article/c...vel-gifts-crow

Racist.

Democrats are getting so desperate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Democrats are getting so desperate.

---

Putting aside political leanings, this is a shocking revelation for its impact on the courts and the judiciary as a whole. One of the main pillars of the courts' validity is their integrity, ethics, and strictly avoiding even the hint of an appearance of impropriety. To learn of this kind of gifting over many years, which can easily be seen as bribing or influence peddling, is just staggering and should be ringing sirens no matter the affiliations of the judge in question.

To put it in perspective, I myself worked in IT for the federal courts for a number of years, just as a helpdesk guy and on various projects, and I was just a regular IT person like I would be in the private sector, except that I happened to be employed by the courts. I was strictly limited by rules on gifts I could accept, no more than $50 as I recall (though I never got any gifts), but also I was not allowed to campaign for any political candidates or express political opinions besides just voting, all in the name of avoiding the appearance of impropriety. This was just as an essentially entry-level peon, who has no power over anyone and no say in any legislation or judicial rulings whatsoever.

The idea that some grunt has to police themselves so as to protect the courts' honor and reputation, but that it doesn't matter for the highest judges in the land is absolutely nonsensical, and this disclosure, or lack of, is going to have extremely far-reaching effects.

Yeah I’m gonna wait for more details on this. Democrats have been pushing through bullshit to make Republicans look bad then we just wait a few weeks and it turns out to be nothing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Yeah I’m gonna wait for more details on this. Democrats have been pushing through bullshit to make Republicans look bad then we just wait a few weeks and it turns out to be nothing.

---

Good idea, given the source.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velfi

Putting aside political leanings, this is a shocking revelation for its impact on the courts and the judiciary as a whole. One of the main pillars of the courts' validity is their integrity, ethics, and strictly avoiding even the hint of an appearance of impropriety. To learn of this kind of gifting over many years, which can easily be seen as bribing or influence peddling, is just staggering and should be ringing sirens no matter the affiliations of the judge in question.

To put it in perspective, I myself worked in IT for the federal courts for a number of years, just as a helpdesk guy and on various projects, and I was just a regular IT person like I would be in the private sector, except that I happened to be employed by the courts. I was strictly limited by rules on gifts I could accept, no more than $50 as I recall (though I never got any gifts), but also I was not allowed to campaign for any political candidates or express political opinions besides just voting, all in the name of avoiding the appearance of impropriety. This was just as an essentially entry-level peon, who has no power over anyone and no say in any legislation or judicial rulings whatsoever.

The idea that some grunt has to police themselves so as to protect the courts' honor and reputation, but that it doesn't matter for the highest judges in the land is absolutely nonsensical, and this disclosure, or lack of, is going to have extremely far-reaching effects.

---

I don't disagree with this, but...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Yeah I’m gonna wait for more details on this. Democrats have been pushing through bullshit to make Republicans look bad then we just wait a few weeks and it turns out to be nothing.

---

I also don't disagree with this.

One thing I do know is that even if this ends up being bullshit and gets debunked, Seran will double down on it forever anyway.

Yup, just as I thought, this is all total bullshit, and it didn't even take weeks to find out.

Judges don't need to declare "gifts" if they are simply hanging out at a person's personal home, which makes complete sense. Why would a judge, or anyone for that matter, have to disclose a "gift" because they visited a friends home?

Okay but the air travel! THE AIR TRAVEL!

Judges weren't required to report this shit until about a month ago, which is why Clarence Thomas is reporting it now. He wasn't hiding anything, because he didn't have to report it before.

Not only that, there is exactly ZERO EVIDENCE (and not even a single suggestion, other than from Seran), that Thomas and his friend even discussed any cases, much less ruled in favor because of said "gifts."

Like it or not, Democrats, judges are allowed to have friends, and they are allowed to hang out at their friends' houses all they want. Fucking hit piece got shot to shit in just a few hours. Like I said, desperate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Velfi

Putting aside political leanings, this is a shocking revelation for its impact on the courts and the judiciary as a whole. One of the main pillars of the courts' validity is their integrity, ethics, and strictly avoiding even the hint of an appearance of impropriety. To learn of this kind of gifting over many years, which can easily be seen as bribing or influence peddling, is just staggering and should be ringing sirens no matter the affiliations of the judge in question.

To put it in perspective, I myself worked in IT for the federal courts for a number of years, just as a helpdesk guy and on various projects, and I was just a regular IT person like I would be in the private sector, except that I happened to be employed by the courts. I was strictly limited by rules on gifts I could accept, no more than $50 as I recall (though I never got any gifts), but also I was not allowed to campaign for any political candidates or express political opinions besides just voting, all in the name of avoiding the appearance of impropriety. This was just as an essentially entry-level peon, who has no power over anyone and no say in any legislation or judicial rulings whatsoever.

The idea that some grunt has to police themselves so as to protect the courts' honor and reputation, but that it doesn't matter for the highest judges in the land is absolutely nonsensical, and this disclosure, or lack of, is going to have extremely far-reaching effects.

---

Not specific to this instance and person, what you are describing has been going on since the dawn of civilization. I agree we should have some reform and oversight, but that requires people in government to act against their own personal interests.

I work for a big financial institution. I can’t trade in any financial markets without getting pre-clearance, hold stocks for at least 30 days, use only an approved list of brokerage accounts, disclose every year all my financial assets & personal account dealings, and they strictly monitor for gifts from clients. A big reason I invest in real estate is that my employer doesn’t track or care about that. Also I just work in merchant services so I never have any insider knowledge… All politicians and judges should have the same strict Frank Dodd BS that I have to go through.

Democrats ran THE EXACT SAME HIT PIECE 12 years. The EXACT SAME THING. Same justice. Same friend. Everything.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/u.../19thomas.html

Democrats just can't stand the fact that Clarence Thomas is a black conservative who has rich friends. Oh sure, Nancy Pelosi can make millions off of her time in office, after all it's just "her husband" who is making all of the money. She has nothing to do with it!

AOC can receive tens of thousands of dollars in gifts to attend the Met Gala.

Democrats can have all of the rich friends they want.

But a black conservative judge has friends who lets Thomas stay at their house sometimes? That's just unacceptable!

Bunch of backward ass racists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Democrats ran THE EXACT SAME HIT PIECE 12 years. The EXACT SAME THING. Same justice. Same friend. Everything.

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/19/u.../19thomas.html

Democrats just can't stand the fact that Clarence Thomas is a black conservative who has rich friends. Oh sure, Nancy Pelosi can make millions off of her time in office, after all it's just "her husband" who is making all of the money. She has nothing to do with it!

AOC can receive tens of thousands of dollars in gifts to attend the Met Gala.

Democrats can have all of the rich friends they want.

But a black conservative judge has friends who lets Thomas stay at their house sometimes? That's just unacceptable!

Bunch of backward ass racists.

---

It's not the /same/ you pedantic fool, the only similarities is the reporting on the friendship and hint of influence peddling between Justice Thomas and the billionaire Crow. What the article -I- posted is the money trail of nondisclosed trips costing thousands, ten thousands of dollars or more provided by Crow to Justice Thomas. It's called evidence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

It's not the /same/ you pedantic fool, the only similarities is the reporting on the friendship and hint of influence peddling between Justice Thomas and the billionaire Crow. What the article -I- posted is the money trail of nondisclosed trips costing thousands, ten thousands of dollars or more provided by Crow to Justice Thomas. It's called evidence.

---

Of course it's different you racist, Leftist, piece of shit. One is a old white Democrat that you are ok with all kinds of graft and corruption and the other is a strong, Conservative black man.

Seran is such a racist piece of shit.

"It's not the same hit piece from 12 years ago! It's totally different! Sure the target and his friend is exactly the same, and the accusations are exactly the same, but it's different!"

Also his friend allowed him to stay at his house. NOT ILLEGAL.

He didn't have to disclose the plane travel until a month ago, so why would he disclose something he didn't have to do?

This isn't the "gotcha!" that you think it is. It's literally absolutely nothing. But pieces of shit like you are more than happy to take something that is nothing and turn it into something. Case in point: the witch hunt being carried out by that fat piece of shit in NY.

Just like the Trump witch hunt, it's very simple: name the crime.

Cite the statute stating supreme court justices can't stay at their friend's house.

Also cite the statute stating supreme court justices must disclose airline travel, and please note when that rule/law went into effect.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Seran is such a racist piece of shit.

"It's not the same hit piece from 12 years ago! It's totally different! Sure the target and his friend is exactly the same, and the accusations are exactly the same, but it's different!"

Also his friend allowed him to stay at his house. NOT ILLEGAL.

He didn't have to disclose the plane travel until a month ago, so why would he disclose something he didn't have to do?

This isn't the "gotcha!" that you think it is. It's literally absolutely nothing. But pieces of shit like you are more than happy to take something that is nothing and turn it into something. Case in point: the witch hunt being carried out by that fat piece of shit in NY.

---

You clearly didn't read the article because the one that I posted pointed out that accepting flights that weren't commercial flights was a disclosable gift. As is staying in another's home on a vacation, the value is also a disclosable gift. But you overlook that because you're a partisan piece of shit.

https://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judg...-states-judges

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You clearly didn't read the article because the one that I posted pointed out that accepting flights that weren't commercial flights was a disclosable gift. As is staying in another's home on a vacation, the value is also a disclosable gift. But you overlook that because you're a partisan piece of shit.

---

Oh the article said it all! So it must be true!

No. Cite the actual statute, not the hit piece. You fucking tool.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Oh the article said it all! So it must be true!

No. Cite the actual statute, not the hit piece. You fucking tool.

---

Already cited, not that you care about objective truth being a fanatic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Already cited, not that you care about objective truth being a fanatic.

---

"I cited the hit piece! My work here is done!"

Just one more question, oh brain dead one: why do you hate black people so much?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

"I cited the hit piece! My work here is done!"

Just one more question, oh brain dead one: why do you hate black people so much?

---

Why do failures like you even bother getting into a conversation when you can't even understand the material? You shouldn't punish the rest of us with your mental deficiency.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You shouldn't punish the rest of us with your mental deficiency.

---

Hello pot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Arqueto

Hello pot.

---

2x...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

But you overlook that because you're a partisan piece of shit.

---

https://i.imgur.com/p4voQQw.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

It's not the /same/ you pedantic fool, the only similarities is the reporting on the friendship and hint of influence peddling between Justice Thomas and the billionaire Crow. What the article -I- posted is the money trail of nondisclosed trips costing thousands, ten thousands of dollars or more provided by Crow to Justice Thomas. It's called evidence.

---

You saying saying "it's d-d-d-d-different!!!" is how I know it's the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Why do failures like you even bother getting into a conversation when you can't even understand the material? You shouldn't punish the rest of us with your mental deficiency.

---

Jesus fucking Christ...

https://badbooksgoodtimes.com/wp-con...reness-gif.gif

Clarence Thomas has issued a statement to racists such as Seran.

Quote:

---

"Harlan and Kathy Crow are among our dearest friends, and we have been friends for over twenty-five years," the justice, who has served on the bench for 32 years, said in a Friday statement.

"As friends do, we have joined them on a number of family trips during the more than quarter century we have known them. Early in my tenure at the Court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable," Thomas said.

"I have endeavored to follow that counsel throughout my tenure, and have always sought to comply with the disclosure guidelines," he said. "These guidelines are now being changed, as the committee of the Judicial Conference responsible for financial disclosure for the entire federal judiciary just this past month announced new guidance. And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future."

---

And he is 100% correct. Judges are allowed to have friends and are allowed to accompany said friends on vacations and stay at their homes and none of this is required to be reported, as long as said friends don't have business before the court, and indeed said friends never had business before the court.

Also as Thomas pointed out, the rules RECENTLY changed and he fully intends to comply with the reporting rules going forward.

But racist assholes such as Seran saw a couple of friends hanging out and immediately went to "Justice for hire" even though there is ZERO EVIDENCE (even from the racist article he linked) suggesting Thomas was bribed in any way, or that the friends had even discussed a single court case during their trips together.

And I want to touch on the laughably absurd "500k dollar vacation!!1!!" The racists over at ProPublica arrived at that figure because that is what it would have cost Thomas to charter his own private plane and yacht, which is so absurd I hardly even know where to begin. First of all, who is to say Thomas would have chartered a private jet instead of flying a commercial plane? And secondly...chartering a yacht?! Are you fuckers even for real? He was hanging out on a friend's private yacht, most likely with other people as well. Why the fuck would Thomas be chartering a private yacht?

This is so dumb that the only clear answer is racism. Y'all hate a black conservative so you want to make him pay.

I knew this story would get blown to shit in short order, but I didn't think it would take less than 24 hours. Democrats really are shitting the bed lately and getting so desperate.

You completely missed that part of the ethics guide that federal judges are required to report as gifts any transportation paid for by other's that is in lieu of commercial services right? Or is it you just completely overlooked that part, as this is the second six figure 'gift' that has benefited Justice Thomas and his rabid MAGA wife.

Federal officials must report such gifts, including stays provided by even close personal friends exceeding a single overnight period, because they're tantamount to bribery. Yes, accepting private jet flights and yacht trips fall under the mandatory ethics reporting when they exceed the federal limit. As of last month, those exclusions you're trumpeting about have been abolished completely it's worth noting.

In short, Justice Thomas was caught receiving unreported gifts. Maybe it will be reported that they were in fact in-kind payment for judicial favors given to Republican claimants. Stay tuned!

Maybe it's all another deflection and attempt at defaming conservatives by the media and we'll ignore it like we always do in another couple days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You completely missed that part of the ethics guide that federal judges are required to report as gifts any transportation paid for by other's that is in lieu of commercial services right? Or is it you just completely overlooked that part, as this is the second six figure 'gift' that has benefited Justice Thomas and his rabid MAGA wife.

Federal officials must report such gifts, including stays provided by even close personal friends exceeding a single overnight period, because they're tantamount to bribery. Yes, accepting private jet flights and yacht trips fall under the mandatory ethics reporting when they exceed the federal limit. As of last month, those exclusions you're trumpeting about have been abolished completely it's worth noting.

In short, Justice Thomas was caught receiving unreported gifts. Maybe it will be reported that they were in fact in-kind payment for judicial favors given to Republican claimants. Stay tuned!

---

No, you're just wrong and stupid and butthurt about everything you post for the 89472303rd day in a row. The only thing worse than your butthurt is your IQ.

But please keep us updated on all the nothing that is going to happen with this.

Seran is wrong as per usual. Judges can vacation and stay with their friends.

It's beginning to sound like Seran is just jealous that Thomas has friends and he doesn't. So Seran is racist and friendless. Sounds about right.

Also LOL at Seran still clinging to this bullshit "500,000 dollar gift!!1!1!!" because Thomas was totally going to charter a private jet and yacht.

Seran logic: Clarence Thomas stepped foot onto a yacht! BRIBERY!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Seran is wrong as per usual. Judges can vacation and stay with their friends.

---

What about black Judges who aren't of the same mind as their Democrat plantation overlords?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

What about black Judges who aren't of the same mind as their Democrat plantation overlords?

---

Well clearly they aren't allowed to have friends. This is seriously where Seran is going with this.

"Thomas stayed overnight at a friend's house! He has to report that as a gift! Thomas attended a party at a mansion with 100 other people! REPORT IT AS A GIFT! BRIBERY! JUSTICE FOR HIRE!!"

I don't know how Seran manages to get more and more pathetic with each passing day, but damn, he manages to find a way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Well clearly they aren't allowed to have friends. This is seriously where Seran is going with this.

"Thomas stayed overnight at a friend's house! He has to report that as a gift! Thomas attended a party at a mansion with 100 other people! REPORT IT AS A GIFT! BRIBERY! JUSTICE FOR HIRE!!"

I don't know how Seran manages to get more and more pathetic with each passing day, but damn, he manages to find a way.

---

Seran can't relate to having friends, let alone rich friends.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Seran is wrong as per usual. Judges can vacation and stay with their friends.

It's beginning to sound like Seran is just jealous that Thomas has friends and he doesn't. So Seran is racist and friendless. Sounds about right.

Also LOL at Seran still clinging to this bullshit "500,000 dollar gift!!1!1!!" because Thomas was totally going to charter a private jet and yacht.

Seran logic: Clarence Thomas stepped foot onto a yacht! BRIBERY!!!!!

---

https://i.imgur.com/FNjrXcx.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Well clearly they aren't allowed to have friends. This is seriously where Seran is going with this.

"Thomas stayed overnight at a friend's house! He has to report that as a gift! Thomas attended a party at a mansion with 100 other people! REPORT IT AS A GIFT! BRIBERY! JUSTICE FOR HIRE!!"

I don't know how Seran manages to get more and more pathetic with each passing day, but damn, he manages to find a way.

---

Cute representation, but as usual you're wrong. Ethics requirements outline that Justice Thomas is required to report these excessively lavish gifts. He failed to do so and so falsified financial disclosure documents. Falsifying documents and perjuring himself on paperwork filed under penalty of perjury, those are very serious offenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Cute representation, but as usual you're wrong. Ethics requirements outline that Justice Thomas is required to report these excessively lavish gifts. He failed to do so and so falsified financial disclosure documents. Falsifying documents and perjuring himself on paperwork filed under penalty of perjury, those are very serious offenses.

---

Is hanging out on a friend's yacht and crashing at their place a lavish gift?

Let's pretend you have friends for a moment...would you charge them for room & board to hang out at your house and go out on your boat?

Justice Thomas's history of accepting bribes brings into question his rulings, particularly his second amendment arguments such as in Heller. Was Thomas being bribed by Republicans on behalf of the NRA for his rulings? We know his wife accepted $500k from Mr. Crow. This comes into light after another mass shooting using an assault style rifle, this time in Kentucky.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Justice Thomas's history of accepting bribes brings into question his rulings, particularly his second amendment arguments such as in Heller. Was Thomas being bribed by Republicans on behalf of the NRA for his rulings? We know his wife accepted $500k from Mr. Crow. This comes into light after another mass shooting using an assault style rifle, this time in Kentucky.

---

No it doesn't. You're just a chronically butthurt welfare sucking retard who isn't capable of anything other than repeating what the fringe left tells you to think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Justice Thomas's history of accepting bribes brings into question his rulings, particularly his second amendment arguments such as in Heller. Was Thomas being bribed by Republicans on behalf of the NRA for his rulings? We know his wife accepted $500k from Mr. Crow. This comes into light after another mass shooting using an assault style rifle, this time in Kentucky.

---

You mean Bruen, idiot. No it does not, but please keep on crying about it for our entertainment.

Ruh-roh, Billionaire Harlan Crow also purchased property from Justice Thomas where his mother was living and failed to disclose the real estate transaction. If that weren't bad enough, the Justice's mother continued to live in the home now owned by the Billionaire who proceeded to commit thousands, if not tens of thousands of dollars in improvements. Bribery laid bare!

Billionaire Harlan Crow Bought Property From Clarence Thomas. The Justice Didn’t Disclose the Deal.

Quote:

---

In 2014, one of Texas billionaire Harlan Crow’s companies purchased a string of properties on a quiet residential street in Savannah, Georgia. It wasn’t a marquee acquisition for the real estate magnate, just an old single-story home and two vacant lots down the road. What made it noteworthy were the people on the other side of the deal: Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas and his relatives.

The transaction marks the first known instance of money flowing from the Republican megadonor to the Supreme Court justice. The Crow company bought the properties for $133,363 from three co-owners — Thomas, his mother and the family of Thomas’ late brother, according to a state tax document and a deed dated Oct. 15, 2014, filed at the Chatham County courthouse.

---

Quote:

---

A federal disclosure law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to disclose the details of most real estate sales over $1,000. Thomas never disclosed his sale of the Savannah properties.

---

Quote:

---

In a statement, Crow said he purchased Thomas’ mother’s house, where Thomas spent part of his childhood, to preserve it for posterity. “My intention is to one day create a public museum at the Thomas home dedicated to telling the story of our nation’s second black Supreme Court Justice,” he said. “I approached the Thomas family about my desire to maintain this historic site so future generations could learn about the inspiring life of one of our greatest Americans.”

Crow’s statement did not directly address why he also bought two vacant lots from Thomas down the street. But he wrote that “the other lots were later sold to a vetted builder who was committed to improving the quality of the neighborhood and preserving its historical integrity.”

ProPublica also asked Crow about the additions on Thomas’ mother’s house, like the new carport. “Improvements were also made to the Thomas property to preserve its long-term viability and accessibility to the public,” Crow said.

---

https://www.propublica.org/article/c...-estate-scotus

Seran still pushing this racist witch hunt? Everyone else seems to have moved on, most leftists didn’t even care about this to begin with.

What an absolutely racist piece of shit. We just need Bhaalizmo to come in here and defend his favorite racist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Seran still pushing this racist witch hunt? Everyone else seems to have moved on, most leftists didn’t even care about this to begin with.

What an absolutely racist piece of shit. We just need Bhaalizmo to come in here and defend his favorite racist.

---

Rent free, Sparky.

Eat shit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

We just need Bhaalizmo to come in here and defend his favorite racist.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhaalizmo

Rent free, Sparky.

Eat shit.

---

https://media.tenor.com/SD-TxYTh3scA...n-schedule.gif

Dance, retard. Dance.

Damn, it turns out that Chief Justice John Roberts is also engaged in shady dealing through his wife. Lifetime appointment means a lifetime of graft. No wonder he declined to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding financial disclosure violations and a lack of ethics by Justice Thomas -- he's doing it too!

Quote:

---

Jane Roberts, who is married to Chief Justice John Roberts, made $10.3 million in commissions from elite law firms, whistleblower documents show

Two years after John Roberts' confirmation as the Supreme Court's chief justice in 2005, his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, made a pivot. After a long and distinguished career as a lawyer, she refashioned herself as a legal recruiter, a matchmaker who pairs job-hunting lawyers up with corporations and firms.


Roberts told a friend that the change was motivated by a desire to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest, given that her husband was now the highest-ranking judge in the country. "There are many paths to the good life," she said. "There are so many things to do if you're open to change and opportunity."


And life was indeed good for the Robertses, at least for the years 2007 to 2014. During that eight-year stretch, according to internal records from her employer, Jane Roberts generated a whopping $10.3 million in commissions, paid out by corporations and law firms for placing high-dollar lawyers with them.


That eye-popping figure comes from records in a whistleblower complaint filed by a disgruntled former colleague of Roberts, who says that as the spouse of the most powerful judge in the United States, the income she earns from law firms who practice before the Court should be subject to public scrutiny.

https://www.businessinsider.com/jane...issions-2023-4

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Damn, it turns out that Chief Justice John Roberts is also engaged in shady dealing through his wife. Lifetime appointment means a lifetime of graft. No wonder he declined to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee regarding financial disclosure violations and a lack of ethics by Justice Thomas -- he's doing it too!

---

"I NO ITS WRITE BECAUSE IT SAY'S SO IN THE BUSINESS INSIDER!" -Seran the Current and GOAT Retard Champion

Wait so suddenly it’s bad when the spouse is making a lot of money? You fuckers have been silent about Nancy Pelosi making hundreds of millions of dollars in her time in office, all because her husband has insider trading with information Nancy is privy to.

But now it’s a problem. You fuckers aren’t even pretending to be serious adults anymore.

Tell us more how Thomas stepping foot in a mansion proves corruption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Wait so suddenly it’s bad when the spouse is making a lot of money? You fuckers have been silent about Nancy Pelosi making hundreds of millions of dollars in her time in office, all because her husband has insider trading with information Nancy is privy to.

But now it’s a problem. You fuckers aren’t even pretending to be serious adults anymore.

Tell us more how Thomas stepping foot in a mansion proves corruption.

---

Hundreds of millions huh? Not quite. Nancy Pelosi is worth roughly $106 million between assets and liabilities, which is still a very sizeable figure to have earned in her 36 years of service. But Nancy isn't a lifetime appointee and is one of more than four hundred votes in the House. Chief Justice Roberts meanwhile is a lifetime appointee and one of nine which hears cases as the highest court of the land, some of those cases being tied to benefactors of his wife. Conflict of interest? You bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

"I NO ITS WRITE BECAUSE IT SAY'S SO IN THE BUSINESS INSIDER!" -Seran the Current and GOAT Retard Champion

---

+1 for Seran accurate apostrophes. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Hundreds of millions huh? Not quite. Nancy Pelosi is worth roughly $106 million between assets and liabilities, which is still a very sizeable figure to have earned in her 36 years of service. But Nancy isn't a lifetime appointee and is one of more than four hundred votes in the House. Chief Justice Roberts meanwhile is a lifetime appointee and one of nine which hears cases as the highest court of the land, some of those cases being tied to benefactors of his wife. Conflict of interest? You bet.

---

Look at you simping for the ultra rich.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Hundreds of millions huh? Not quite. Nancy Pelosi is worth roughly $106 million between assets and liabilities, which is still a very sizeable figure to have earned in her 36 years of service. But Nancy isn't a lifetime appointee and is one of more than four hundred votes in the House. Chief Justice Roberts meanwhile is a lifetime appointee and one of nine which hears cases as the highest court of the land, some of those cases being tied to benefactors of his wife. Conflict of interest? You bet.

---

U mad bro?

Harlan Crow paid for Justice Thomas's wife, paid for his Mom, paid for the Justice himself in expensive six figure vacations, and now we find out he paid six figures for the Justice's grandson. Fucking unreal the corruption in the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas needs to go to jail if true.

Quote:

---

Clarence Thomas Had a Child in Private School. Harlan Crow Paid the Tuition.

In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was “raising him as a son.”

Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin’s tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.

The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin’s tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

“Harlan picked up the tab,” said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. “Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well,” Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire’s Adirondacks estate.


ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin’s education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin’s education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow’s.

https://www.propublica.org/article/c...tuition-scotus

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Harlan Crow paid for Justice Thomas's wife, paid for his Mom, paid for the Justice himself in expensive six figure vacations, and now we find out he paid six figures for the Justice's grandson. Fucking unreal the corruption in the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas needs to go to jail if true.

---

Damn. Just one of those vacations is more money than the total earnings in your entire life. How does that make you feel Seran?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Harlan Crow paid for Justice Thomas's wife, paid for his Mom, paid for the Justice himself in expensive six figure vacations, and now we find out he paid six figures for the Justice's grandson. Fucking unreal the corruption in the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas needs to go to jail if true.

---

What proof do you have that Harlan Crow benefited from his generosity? By proof I mean, concrete proof.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Harlan Crow paid for Justice Thomas's wife, paid for his Mom, paid for the Justice himself in expensive six figure vacations, and now we find out he paid six figures for the Justice's grandson. Fucking unreal the corruption in the Supreme Court. Justice Thomas needs to go to jail if true.

---

Your dad paid for your mom.

Worst investment ever.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wAOhNP9qrK4

Seran misses the days when you could just lynch a black man when they got out of line.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bVRIpMwuUzM

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

What proof do you have that Harlan Crow benefited from his generosity? By proof I mean, concrete proof.

---

First and foremost, fuck you and good morning!

Secondly, corruption via failure to disclose the federally mandated gifts, cash payments and business dealings with Harlan Crow are what have been outlined here and the law which has been broken. The business interest that Crow had before the Supreme Court that Justice Thomas did not recuse himself on is a separate matter altogether which I encourage you to educate yourself on.

May the Fourth be with you.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

What proof do you have that Harlan Crow benefited from his generosity? By proof I mean, concrete proof.

---

First and foremost, fuck you and good morning!

Secondly, corruption via failure to disclose the federally mandated gifts, cash payments and business dealings with Harlan Crow are what have been outlined here and the law which has been broken. The business interest that Crow had before the Supreme Court that Justice Thomas did not recuse himself on is a separate matter altogether which I encourage you to educate yourself on.

May the Fourth be with you.

---

Translation: "I don't have any proof, I'm just butthurt over it because I was told by my TV to be butthurt over it."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

First and foremost, fuck you and good morning!

Secondly, corruption via failure to disclose the federally mandated gifts, cash payments and business dealings with Harlan Crow are what have been outlined here and the law which has been broken. The business interest that Crow had before the Supreme Court that Justice Thomas did not recuse himself on is a separate matter altogether which I encourage you to educate yourself on.

May the Fourth be with you.

---

So.. none. As expected.

You can't even make this shit up anymore.

Quote:

---

Liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor declined to recuse herself from multiple copyright infringement cases involving book publisher Penguin Random House despite having been paid millions by the firm for her books, making it by far her largest source of income, records show.

In 2010, she got a $1.2 million book advance from Knopf Doubleday Group, a part of the conglomerate. In 2012, she reported receiving two advance payments from the publisher totaling $1.9 million.

---

You see, Seran, THIS is what corruption looks like.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

You can't even make this shit up anymore.



You see, Seran, THIS is what corruption looks like.

---

Is it though? Recusal is at theater discretion of the judge or by motion of a moving party. Justice Sotomayor has a public relationship and business relationship which she disclosed compensation from book sales annually. Meanwhile, Justice Thomas hid his relationship with Billionaire Harlan Crow, failed to disclose the relationship at the time the relevant hearing was where recusal was in question, and hid hundreds of thousands, or millions in money, compensation or gifts paid directly to him or indirectly through his wife, household and family. So yeah, you clearly don't understand the difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

No that's d-d-d-d-different!!!!!

---

.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Is it though? Recusal is at theater discretion of the judge or by motion of a moving party.

---

So let me get this straight, recusal is at the discretion of the judge so therefore it can't possibly be corruption, even though she was getting money from this publisher and this publisher had business before the court and therefore benefited from said financial transaction?

But accepting gifts from close personal friends (and at the time it was also discretionary to report it), who don't have business before the court so they can't benefit from said gifts, is corruption?

Seran, just save everyone some time and say "LOL! Thomas is a black conservative so therefore GUILTY! Sotomayor is a Democrat so therefore INNOCENT!"

You must be frying what's left of your tiny brain trying to make sense out of defending Sotomayor's actual corruption and attacking Thomas when clearly there is no corruption.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Is it though? Recusal is at theater discretion of the judge or by motion of a moving party. Justice Sotomayor has a public relationship and business relationship which she disclosed compensation from book sales annually. Meanwhile, Justice Thomas hid his relationship with Billionaire Harlan Crow, failed to disclose the relationship at the time the relevant hearing was where recusal was in question, and hid hundreds of thousands, or millions in money, compensation or gifts paid directly to him or indirectly through his wife, household and family. So yeah, you clearly don't understand the difference.

---

Your outrage is quite selective.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Your outrage is quite retarded.

---

FTFY.

Selective denotes an intelligence behind it.. as if he were capable of making a decision.

He's not.

He's outraged at whatever MSNBC tells him he is outraged about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

So let me get this straight, recusal is at the discretion of the judge so therefore it can't possibly be corruption, even though she was getting money from this publisher and this publisher had business before the court and therefore benefited from said financial transaction?

But accepting gifts from close personal friends (and at the time it was also discretionary to report it), who don't have business before the court so they can't benefit from said gifts, is corruption?

Seran, just save everyone some time and say "LOL! Thomas is a black conservative so therefore GUILTY! Sotomayor is a Democrat so therefore INNOCENT!"

You must be frying what's left of your tiny brain trying to make sense out of defending Sotomayor's actual corruption and attacking Thomas when clearly there is no corruption.

---

I mean it's pretty clear your political bias doesn't allow you to see the difference between the two circumstances, but if you're not even going to try what's the point?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

I mean it's pretty clear your political bias doesn't allow you to see the difference between the two circumstances, but if you're not even going to try what's the point?

---

https://i.imgur.com/JnTxd4L.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

I mean it's pretty clear your political bias doesn't allow you to see the difference between the two circumstances, but if you're not even going to try what's the point?

---

Jesus fucking Christ..

https://badbooksgoodtimes.com/wp-con...reness-gif.gif

Uh-oh! It turns out several current and former Democrat justices also went on vacations and accepted other lavish gifts from Democrat mega donors.

Former Democrat justice Breyer went on 219 said vacations during his time on the court.

Remember one of my first posts in this thread said this would end up being a nothing burger, we just had to wait few weeks for the the truth to come out?

Yeah. Looks like I was right yet again. Whenever Democrats are onto their newest outrage remember to ignore them for several weeks until the facts come out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Uh-oh! It turns out several current and former Democrat justices also went on vacations and accepted other lavish gifts from Democrat mega donors.

Former Democrat justice Breyer went on 219 said vacations during his time on the court.

Remember one of my first posts in this thread said this would end up being a birthing burger, we just had to wait few weeks for the the truth to come out?

Yeah. Looks like I was right yet again. Whenever Democrats are onto their newest outrage remember to ignore them for several weeks until the facts come out.

---

Are they black and don't toe the Democrat line?

No?

Then they don't count.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Uh-oh! It turns out several current and former Democrat justices also went on vacations and accepted other lavish gifts from Democrat mega donors.

Former Democrat justice Breyer went on 219 said vacations during his time on the court.

Remember one of my first posts in this thread said this would end up being a nothing burger, we just had to wait few weeks for the the truth to come out?

Yeah. Looks like I was right yet again. Whenever Democrats are onto their newest outrage remember to ignore them for several weeks until the facts come out.

---

Source or it didn't happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Source or it didn't happen.

---

http://forum.gsplayers.com/showthrea...or-Hire-SCOTUS

What is really funny about the Faux Nudes article is it states in the first few paragraphs that Justices Gorsuch and Thomas have failed to report large, compromising transactions or gifts. Meanwhile the cited Democrats all publicly disclosed their positions. I can totally see why the GOP blocked new legislation to enforce financial disclosures on the Supreme Court, their nominees are all proven to be corrupt or rapists.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

What is really funny about the Faux Nudes article is it states in the first few paragraphs that Justices Gorsuch and Thomas have failed to report large, compromising transactions or gifts. Meanwhile the cited Democrats all publicly disclosed their positions. I can totally see why the GOP blocked new legislation to enforce financial disclosures on the Supreme Court, their nominees are all proven to be corrupt or rapists.

---

So, it's not that they received the item(s), it's that they didn't disclose them that has you this distraught and upset?

If Justice Thomas had disclosed them according to the law, you would find no fault with it?

I don't think the court should be allowed to accept donations OR gifts from anyone other than family and friends, and should have to disclose those donations and gifts.

Maybe I'm being pigheaded, but I believe transparency is the ONLY right path for ANYONE in politics. And that includes Ronald McDonald...err I mean Donald Trump.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elanthil

I don't think the court should be allowed to accept donations OR gifts from anyone other than family and friends, and should have to disclose those donations and gifts.

Maybe I'm being pigheaded, but I believe transparency is the ONLY right path for ANYONE in politics. And that includes Ronald McDonald...err I mean Donald Trump.

---

I agree.

So, what are your feelings about the Biden Family Business and individual stock trades by members of Congress?

I think they should have to disclose EVERYTHING, no matter how damning.

Personally, I think Biden should be impeached for his dealings with China (giving our oil to an enemy? for shame), and his son needs to go to prison.

But...at least Biden hasnt grabbed anyone by the pussy or anything, so I guess hes not TOO repugnant. I liked what Trump did, overall, but I just used to think (and still do), that he needs to learn to shut his fucking mouth, because everytime he talks he shoves his foot farther down his throat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elanthil

I think they should have to disclose EVERYTHING, no matter how damning.

Personally, I think Biden should be impeached for his dealings with China (giving our oil to an enemy? for shame), and his son needs to go to prison.

---

Biden's dealings with China is the least of his problems.

And what does Hunter need to be imprisoned for?

Quote:

---

But...at least Biden hasnt grabbed anyone by the pussy or anything, so I guess hes not TOO repugnant.

---

He hasn't?

Ever hear of Tara Reade?

Besides... I think most people that work for Joe are too old for his taste....

Quote:

---

I liked what Trump did, overall, but I just used to think (and still do), that he needs to learn to shut his fucking mouth, because everytime he talks he shoves his foot farther down his throat.

---

The US was better off under Trump than under Biden.

I mean, what heterosexual man who's actually had sex has not grabbed one?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elanthil

I don't think the court should be allowed to accept donations OR gifts from anyone other than family and friends, and should have to disclose those donations and gifts.

Maybe I'm being pigheaded, but I believe transparency is the ONLY right path for ANYONE in politics. And that includes Ronald McDonald...err I mean Donald Trump.

---

This is why Jefferson was far superior to Adams. Adams still believed in the notion of an incorruptible class of men. Jefferson understood, no matter what type of government, government ultimately ends in tyranny that has to be cleansed from time to time.

Holy shit. Here's another smoking gun, this time $80,000 paid to Justice Thomas's wife Ginni in what appears to be a pay for play scheme to get Justice Thomas to give special attention to the group's amicus brief in support of a matter where Thomas wound up being a deciding justice ruling in favor.

Quote:

---

Judicial activist directed fees to Clarence Thomas’s wife, urged ‘no mention of Ginni’

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.”

Conway’s firm, the Polling Company, sent the Judicial Education Project a $25,000 bill that day. Per Leo’s instructions, it listed the purpose as “Supplement for Constitution Polling and Opinion Consulting,” the documents show.

In all, according to the documents, the Polling Company paid Thomas’s firm, Liberty Consulting, $80,000 between June 2011 and June 2012, and it expected to pay $20,000 more before the end of 2012. The documents reviewed by The Post do not indicate the precise nature of any work Thomas did for the Judicial Education Project or the Polling Company.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...ni/ar-AA1aL642

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Holy shit. Here's another smoking gun, this time $80,000 paid to Justice Thomas's wife Ginni in what appears to be a pay for play scheme to get Justice Thomas to give special attention to the group's amicus brief in support of a matter where Thomas wound up being a deciding justice ruling in favor.

---

And Seran is going to continue to ignore all the other justices getting payments. The only thing that matters is removing a conservative black man.

A true blue Democrat straight out of the 1800's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Elanthil

But...at least Biden hasnt grabbed anyone by the pussy or anything, so I guess hes not TOO repugnant.

---

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4PLSPvJ9BY

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

And Seran is going to continue to ignore all the other justices getting payments. The only thing that matters is removing a conservative black man.

A true blue Democrat straight out of the 1800's.

---

You and Dreaven are like two peas in a pod. Two conservative justices received cash payments, expensive gifts and travel to themselves or family and failed to disclose it. This is bad. Two liberal justices received gifts and travel and disclosed it. This is following federal law. See the difference yet? I'll give you a hint, Conservative justices were clearly accepting bribes, attempted to hide it, but were caught.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You and Dreaven are like two peas in a pod. Two conservative justices received cash payments, expensive gifts and travel to themselves or family and failed to disclose it. This is bad. Two liberal justices received gifts and travel and disclosed it. This is following federal law. See the difference yet? I'll give you a hint, Conservative justices were clearly accepting bribes, attempted to hide it, but were caught.

---

We get it Seran. You would believe any lie and sell your own mother into slavery just to see that conservative Uncle Tom be removed from SCOTUS.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V4PLSPvJ9BY

---

The fact that such a disturbing trend... especially towards children... is not more widely condemned is disturbing as hell.

How the fuck can you as a father watch that happen to your daughter... who gives a fuck if the guy is President... that's fucking /shiver.. holy fuck... how do you not put a fist through his face??

God... literally making my stomach turn watching him maneuver that second girl around and wrap his arm around her waist... I mean an actual, visceral, sickening gut reaction... how? I mean, just how...

If you showed that to anyone... not knowing the situation... their first reaction would be child molester... but because it's Biden... /sigh...

Omg... and the one where he pulls that girls hair back and says "Can I get one of her just alone..."... holy fuck... WTF is wrong with us as a people...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

You and Dreaven are like two peas in a pod. Two conservative justices received cash payments, expensive gifts and travel to themselves or family and failed to disclose it. This is bad. Two liberal justices received gifts and travel and disclosed it. This is following federal law. See the difference yet? I'll give you a hint, Conservative justices were clearly accepting bribes, attempted to hide it, but were caught.

---

Actually, I believe the whole system is corrupt and needs to be rezzed. Unlike you, I don't believe one party or the other is saintly. I just know one side wants to continue to murder children in the womb, castrate children, feed children pharmaceuticals and take away everyone's right to self defense.

I know the system is corrupt, I'm just making sure the corruption works in my favor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

Actually, I believe the whole system is corrupt and needs to be rezzed. Unlike you, I don't believe one party or the other is saintly. I just know one side wants to continue to murder children in the womb, castrate children, feed children pharmaceuticals and take away everyone's right to self defense.

I know the system is corrupt, I'm just making sure the corruption works in my favor.

---

The system itself is not corrupt... that's the beauty of the system in the US... it was designed based off of understanding human nature, and the checks and balances were created to hamper it's corruption...

Sadly... the people that we have elected, and the continuing failing education and ignorance of the populous is allowing those in power to warp, distort, and circumvent the "system".

It's a fallacy to claim the system is broken... the indifference of the people to educate themselves and demand better is what's broken.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

The system itself is not corrupt... that's the beauty of the system in the US... it was designed based off of understanding human nature, and the checks and balances were created to hamper it's corruption...

Sadly... the people that we have elected, and the continuing failing education and ignorance of the populous is allowing those in power to warp, distort, and circumvent the "system".

It's a fallacy to claim the system is broken... the indifference of the people to educate themselves and demand better is what's broken.

---

I’m with you on this one. While the system isn’t perfect, what is actually broken is both the politicians & the American people itself. This is what happens when we embrace hedonism and lose our communal values & culture. What does it mean to be American? What is our country’s legacy? What are our dreams for the future? These are things that if asked 50 years ago you would hear a lot of similar responses, but today we are divided & weak.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

I’m with you on this one. While the system isn’t perfect, what is actually broken is both the politicians & the American people itself. This is what happens when we embrace hedonism and lose our communal values & culture. What does it mean to be American? What is our country’s legacy? What are our dreams for the future? These are things that if asked 50 years ago you would hear a lot of similar responses, but today we are divided & weak.

---

This is what happens when the system is way over bloated and the new ruling class will do anything and everything to keep their families in power and money.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

The system itself is not corrupt... that's the beauty of the system in the US... it was designed based off of understanding human nature, and the checks and balances were created to hamper it's corruption...

Sadly... the people that we have elected, and the continuing failing education and ignorance of the populous is allowing those in power to warp, distort, and circumvent the "system".

It's a fallacy to claim the system is broken... the indifference of the people to educate themselves and demand better is what's broken.

---

I should correct myself, I do mean the people are corrupt. Though, it's never been the system that becomes corrupted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

I should correct myself, I do mean the people are corrupt. Though, it's never been the system that becomes corrupted.

---

I wonder if people in the USSR were having the same type of discussion in the mid to late 80s before it collapsed. It’s not so much that communism the system if corrupt per se (well it is and just disguises as a revolutionary utopia in my eyes but ignore that for a moment) but the selfish people that use the system to gain wealth & power.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

I wonder if people in the USSR were having the same type of discussion in the mid to late 80s before it collapsed. It’s not so much that communism the system if corrupt per say, but the selfish people that use the system for to gain wealth & power.

---

Even a dictator can be good government. Julius Caesar wasn't assassinated because he was hated or corrupt, he was assassinated because he was too good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

Even a dictator can be good government. Julius Caesar wasn't assassinated because he was hated or corrupt, he was assassinated because he was too good.

---

An even better statesman was Caesar Augustus who was really the first true Emperor and ended the Republic. But that’s the thing about dictatorships…you are more likely to get a weak, lazy, piece of shit than you are someone that works to improve all aspects of society.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

I wonder if people in the USSR were having the same type of discussion in the mid to late 80s before it collapsed. It’s not so much that communism the system if corrupt per se (well it is and just disguises as a revolutionary utopia in my eyes but ignore that for a moment) but the selfish people that use the system to gain wealth & power.

---

This is why any other system that's been attempted did not protect the rights of it's citizens as well as the Constitutional Republic format... other systems are idealistic and, if was not inhabited by human influence, would overall be more harmonious...

The problem is, those systems - ie. Communism, Socialism, The Prime Directive, etc... are not successful... is because there are no built in constraints to their implementation by the humans that control them.

There is a reason the US founders highlighted in the Declaration of Independence... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

The rights are the peoples upon being born... not given to them by their Government.

There is a reason they also used the term "Creator" vs. "God"... so that the rights they enumerated would cover anyone's belief system... not just ones of Christian Orthodoxy (even though the majority were Christian at the time)... and also why they never mentioned God at all in the Constitution.

They were very astute and understood that political systems were only as good as the people that implemented them... and therefore created one that tried to limit those in power abusing those that they governed, through the systems of Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers.

It worked for awhile... but sadly we are where we are today.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

This is why any other system that's been attempted did not protect the rights of it's citizens as well as the Constitutional Republic format... other systems are idealistic and, if was not inhabited by human influence, would overall be more harmonious...

The problem is, those systems - ie. Communism, Socialism, The Prime Directive, etc... are not successful... is because there are no built in constraints to their implementation by the humans that control them.

There is a reason the US founders highlighted in the Declaration of Independence... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

The rights are the peoples upon being born... not given to them by their Government.

There is a reason they also used the term "Creator" vs. "God"... so that the rights they enumerated would cover anyone's belief system... not just ones of Christian Orthodoxy (even though the majority were Christian at the time)... and also why they never mentioned God at all in the Constitution.

They were very astute and understood that political systems were only as good as the people that implemented them... and therefore created one that tried to limit those in power abusing those that they governed, through the systems of Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers.

It worked for awhile... but sadly we are where we are today.

---

The federal government was never intended to be as big or powerful as it is now. We have but a shadow left of the government they established, but yes thankfully we still have constitutionality protected rights & a system of checks and balances…for as long as we can keep it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

This is why any other system that's been attempted did not protect the rights of it's citizens as well as the Constitutional Republic format... other systems are idealistic and, if was not inhabited by human influence, would overall be more harmonious...

The problem is, those systems - ie. Communism, Socialism, The Prime Directive, etc... are not successful... is because there are no built in constraints to their implementation by the humans that control them.

There is a reason the US founders highlighted in the Declaration of Independence... "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed...."

The rights are the peoples upon being born... not given to them by their Government.

There is a reason they also used the term "Creator" vs. "God"... so that the rights they enumerated would cover anyone's belief system... not just ones of Christian Orthodoxy (even though the majority were Christian at the time)... and also why they never mentioned God at all in the Constitution.

They were very astute and understood that political systems were only as good as the people that implemented them... and therefore created one that tried to limit those in power abusing those that they governed, through the systems of Checks and Balances and Separation of Powers.

It worked for awhile... but sadly we are where we are today.

---

Favorite Conservative past time, getting all misty eyed about the declaration of independence and moaning over how the plain tenants laid out in it should be the sole governing rules of our land. I'll tell you, we're the longest standing democracy for a reason, we have in almost every part of our government the checks and balances that the Framers and Fathers envisioned. Except, that the Executive and Judicial have dreamed up an immunity to the laws that govern our land.

Conservative justices flaunting their corruption and receiving six figure gifts? It's amazing there isn't a federal inquiry into this right now, the law was broken. Yet, the Framers said that Justice's have a lifelong appointment and the vastly partisan Legislative branch probably couldn't even agree to impeach a justice who murdered someone. Pathetic.

Worse yet, the former administration decided the President is immune from prosecution and set a precedent that no matter what happened, only an impeachment in a divided congress could stop him. That is an even worse check on uncontrolled power. Biden could probably go out and rob a Walgreens of all it's hard candy and ice cream and suffer nothing more than Republicans frothing at the mouth slightly more than they are now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

we're the longest standing democracy for a reason

---

That reason being, we're not a democracy.

The founders were smart enough to predict people like you would come up with pop-culture movements of ignorance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Favorite Conservative past time, getting all misty eyed about the declaration of independence and moaning over how the plain tenants laid out in it should be the sole governing rules of our land. I'll tell you, we're the longest standing democracy for a reason, we have in almost every part of our government the checks and balances that the Framers and Fathers envisioned. Except, that the Executive and Judicial have dreamed up an immunity to the laws that govern our land.

Conservative justices flaunting their corruption and receiving six figure gifts? It's amazing there isn't a federal inquiry into this right now, the law was broken. Yet, the Framers said that Justice's have a lifelong appointment and the vastly partisan Legislative branch probably couldn't even agree to impeach a justice who murdered someone. Pathetic.

Worse yet, the former administration decided the President is immune from prosecution and set a precedent that no matter what happened, only an impeachment in a divided congress could stop him. That is an even worse check on uncontrolled power. Biden could probably go out and rob a Walgreens of all it's hard candy and ice cream and suffer nothing more than Republicans frothing at the mouth slightly more than they are now.

---

?

What Government are you talking about?

I never once referenced a Democracy... I talked about the Constitutional Republic that is our Nations framework.

You know you're an idiot... You openly support the grooming of children... You openly support the genital mutilation of children in defiance of International Law... you openly support segregation... and you are to stupid to understand that we are a Constitutional Republic.

People like you are why the Founders designed the Government the way they did... to protect the populous from insane people like you from subjugating others.

Just shut the fuck up already... I'm already enraged having watched that video earlier of Biden molesting those children in plain sight of everyone, and everyone just letting it go... Having to deal with a pedo, sorry MAP, like you on these forums is doubly so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

I wonder if people in the USSR were having the same type of discussion in the mid to late 80s before it collapsed. It’s not so much that communism the system if corrupt per se (well it is and just disguises as a revolutionary utopia in my eyes but ignore that for a moment) but the selfish people that use the system to gain wealth & power.

---

Interesting question! I spoke to my wife’s parents and grandparents about this a little bit ago, they said generally speaking, the people had absolutely no clue about what was really going on. They believed the government was looking out for the people’s best interest. They were just as shocked as everyone else when the USSR collapsed. While my wife’s grandparents, looking back are happy… my wife’s mom though wants to see the return of the USSR and all its glory(what glory? Lol). I was shocked, I thought it would be the other way around.

My wife’s grandparents absolutely love me, and don’t care where I am from, my wife’s mother thinks her daughter married the enemy. Propaganda is still massive in Russia, as it was back in the day.

My wife’s mother got her visa to America, and she was having a moral crisis, she misses her grandchild so much, but didn’t want to come to America. I think it was partly because she was afraid that all the propaganda she’s been fed, would turn out to be wrong in her eyes, and she wouldn’t know what to do.

Russians are an amazing people and have an astounding history... what happened from the Bolsheviks, through Lenin, the Western front, and Stalin really was sad for it's people.

95% of people in the world, regardless of belief system/heritage/geographical location/etc. are all the same... and want the same things for themselves and their families.

Sadly the 5% throughout history prey upon the natural inclination of a species, that over millennium, found safety and survived by banding together (strength in numbers)... but out of that species only certain ones are true leaders, or rather influencers, that can lead the masses to greatness and prosperity... or those with that capability are able to sway the masses into horrific situations for their own personal benefit... and those that are truly selfless - with that capability, are much fewer and far between than those who are selfish with the same capabilities.

These proclivities define humans... they will always define humans, regardless of which era we exist... it is, the human condition.

The only way to combat it, is ensuring the masses understand such things... the way it keeps occurring, is the masses are not taught critical thinking or historical context to understand such.

I find it wonderful you're and your wife's family get along so well. Hopefully your mother-in-law comes around :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

Russians are an amazing people and have an astounding history... what happened from the Bolsheviks, through Lenin, the Western front, and Stalin really was sad for it's people.

95% of people in the world, regardless of belief system/heritage/geographical location/etc. are all the same... and want the same things for themselves and their families.

Sadly the 5% throughout history prey upon the natural inclination of a species, that over millennium, found safety and survived by banding together (strength in numbers)... but out of that species only certain ones are true leaders, or rather influencers, that can lead the masses to greatness and prosperity... or those with that capability are able to sway the masses into horrific situations for their own personal benefit... and those that are truly selfless - with that capability, are much fewer and far between than those who are selfish with the same capabilities.

These proclivities define humans... they will always define humans, regardless of which era we exist... it is, the human condition.

The only way to combat it, is ensuring the masses understand such things... the way it keeps occurring, is the masses are not taught critical thinking or historical context to understand such.

I find it wonderful you're and your wife's family get along so well. Hopefully your mother-in-law comes around :)

---

I’m fighting against 50+ years of propaganda! Might take a while haha.
The problem with Russians, is their way of thinking. The best word I can use to describe Russian people in general is, “content”. They don’t care if they have more, as long as they have enough to get by. While the younger generation is branching out from this by traveling and seeing the world, the majority know of nothing outside their own borders. So she sees america as the opposite of what she thinks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Shaps

?

What Government are you talking about?

I never once referenced a Democracy... I talked about the Constitutional Republic that is our Nations framework.

You know you're an idiot... You openly support the grooming of children... You openly support the genital mutilation of children in defiance of International Law... you openly support segregation... and you are to stupid to understand that we are a Constitutional Republic.

People like you are why the Founders designed the Government the way they did... to protect the populous from insane people like you from subjugating others.

Just shut the fuck up already... I'm already enraged having watched that video earlier of Biden molesting those children in plain sight of everyone, and everyone just letting it go... Having to deal with a pedo, sorry MAP, like you on these forums is doubly so.

---

Why yes, we are a Representative Democracy, like it or not our nation was founded on the principle of elections where all it's eligible population votes for it's representatives who lead the nation. Not entirely sure why that frightens you so much, but you need to get your head out of your ass. No matter what way you look at it, you can't fail to see we have a democratically elected government, we vote for our repetitive who in turn lead the nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Why yes, we are a Representative Democracy, like it or not our nation was founded on the principle of elections where all it's eligible population votes for it's representatives who lead the nation. Not entirely sure why that frightens you so much, but you need to get your head out of your ass. No matter what way you look at it, you can't fail to see we have a democratically elected government, we vote for our repetitive who in turn lead the nation.

---

The funny part is that you don't know the difference.

Here's a hint, those "repetitive's" don't have to vote how the electorate demands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Why yes, we are a Representative Democracy, like it or not our nation was founded on the principle of elections where all it's eligible population votes for it's representatives who lead the nation. Not entirely sure why that frightens you so much, but you need to get your head out of your ass. No matter what way you look at it, you can't fail to see we have a democratically elected government, we vote for our repetitive who in turn lead the nation.

---

You continue to demonstrate that you have no clue what a Constitutional Republic is. We know you failed civics/social studies and you continue to demonstrate it ever day. I would suggest you read a real book on it however I know you won't. Go back to the welfare office and tell them you need an increase because you are functionally retarded.

I totally get why a no name person like Mike Lee of Utah might be screeching about being a republic and not a democracy, his belief is that a state of 3 million people with all of 4 people in the House of Representatives should be able to call the shots for a nation of 330 million. Problem is, we're not a minority rule nation, we're a representative democracy where a state like California has 52 representatives for a population of 39 million. Our system of government is designed to represent majority rule, reflecting the will of the people. That is why we're a Representative Democracy.

Less surprising that Mike Lee would be advocating a form of government denying democratic voice of the people when you consider his involvement in the January 6th conspiracy. Afterall, he was a central voice for an alternate slate of electors up to January 6th with the hopes of invalidating the actual vote of the Electoral College, only Mike Pence refused to be involved with their attempts to de-certify the vote. Team Trump had the entire plot laid out to overturn the results of the election and thus put the vote before the House and Senate where they were convinced they'd win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

I totally get why a no name person like Mike Lee of Utah might be screeching about being a republic and not a democracy, his belief is that a state of 3 million people with all of 4 people in the House of Representatives should be able to call the shots for a nation of 330 million. Problem is, we're not a minority rule nation, we're a representative democracy where a state like California has 52 representatives for a population of 39 million. Our system of government is designed to represent majority rule, reflecting the will of the people. That is why we're a Representative Democracy.

---

If we are only a Representative Democracy... then how do you explain that California, with a population of 39 million.. and Wyoming with a population of 500K.. have the exact same number of US Senators? That doesn't sound very representative of the population of each state.. does it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Less surprising that Mike Lee would be advocating a form of government denying democratic voice of the people when you consider his involvement in the January 6th conspiracy. Afterall, he was a central voice for an alternate slate of electors up to January 6th with the hopes of invalidating the actual vote of the Electoral College, only Mike Pence refused to be involved with their attempts to de-certify the vote. Team Trump had the entire plot laid out to overturn the results of the election and thus put the vote before the House and Senate where they were convinced they'd win.

---

Mike who?

https://media0.giphy.com/media/pXi9i...=200w.gif&ct=g

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Solkern

I’m fighting against 50+ years of propaganda! Might take a while haha.
The problem with Russians, is their way of thinking. The best word I can use to describe Russian people in general is, “content”. They don’t care if they have more, as long as they have enough to get by. While the younger generation is branching out from this by traveling and seeing the world, the majority know of nothing outside their own borders. So she sees america as the opposite of what she thinks.

---

Bro…all you got to do is get here, drive to a nice Taco Bell and buy her a Chalupa Supreme, and then take her to Costco and hand her your credit card. You can watch in real time 50+ years of Soviet propaganda melt away before your own eyes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Bro…all you got to do is get here, drive to a nice Taco Bell and buy her a Chalupa Supreme, and then take her to Costco and hand her your credit card. You can watch in real time 50+ years of Soviet propaganda melt away before your own eyes.

---

ROFL! Dude I haven’t even taken my wife to Costco yet. The thought of her going there… scares the fuck out of me!

Also…make her watch Rocky 4 and the victory speech to the Russians after defeating Ivan Drago.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

If we are only a Representative Democracy... then how do you explain that California, with a population of 39 million.. and Wyoming with a population of 500K.. have the exact same number of US Senators? That doesn't sound very representative of the population of each state.. does it?

---

How do I explain it.. what the fuck dude, that is in the constitution. Duh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Also…make her watch Rocky 4 and the victory speech to the Russians after defeating Ivan Drago.

---

Nah, I’d prefer to see my child grow up!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

How do I explain it.. what the fuck dude, that is in the constitution. Duh.

---

So, it's not just a representative democracy as you claimed.

I'm shocked that you are wrong.

Really.

Excellent breakdown of just how criminal Justice Thomas has acted


https://youtu.be/suVD6h7WkcQ

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Excellent breakdown of just how criminal Justice Thomas has acted

---

I would want to change the subject too if I were as wrong as you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Excellent breakdown of just how criminal Justice Thomas has acted


https://youtu.be/suVD6h7WkcQ

---

Another legal eagle video. Didn't this clown also go all in on the Russia collusion hoax? He looks super serious, though.

You're like a dog going back to lap up it's own vomit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

I totally get why a no name person like Mike Lee of Utah might be screeching about being a republic and not a democracy, his belief is that a state of 3 million people with all of 4 people in the House of Representatives should be able to call the shots for a nation of 330 million. Problem is, we're not a minority rule nation, we're a representative democracy where a state like California has 52 representatives for a population of 39 million. Our system of government is designed to represent majority rule, reflecting the will of the people. That is why we're a Representative Democracy.

---

This right here is the scariest thing, from a political perspective, you have probably ever said.

The fact you don't understand the design, and implementation, of our Constitutional Republic... is so that the majority can not inflict harm on the minority.

Those in power have got ignorant people like you to really believe what you just said... when it is completely the opposite. Absolutely astounding.

The fact that you are essentially supporting Nazism, and what led to the atrocities of WW2, to occur in our own Nation is horrifying.

And sadly... because of morons like you, that is the direction this Nation is headed... because you are dumb as shit.

Conservatives are gaming for the future, I get it. The Republican party is dying out, the current moderates Democrats will one day be the future Right wing party and those few of you still waving the confederate flag thing calling yourself members of a Constitutional Republic will give you power over everyone else. I get it.

What you don't seem to get is a bunch of snowflakes trying to stamp out gays, abortion, women's rights, etc., aren't protecting yourselves from harm, you're inflicting harm on others by imposing your insane beliefs that all others should be like you. In a Representative Democracy like yours, you need only convince enough people that you are in the right to get your wish. Currently some 75% or more of the nation supports those things I just named, so you're going to have to get used to it. Or better yet, move to Russia or Belarus where the like minded folks live.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Conservatives are gaming for the future, I get it. The Republican party is dying out,

---

Actually, according to Gallup polls, the Republican party is stagnate. The Democrats are losing numbers though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Conservatives are gaming for the future, I get it. The Republican party is dying out, the current moderates Democrats will one day be the future Right wing party and those few of you still waving the confederate flag thing calling yourself members of a Constitutional Republic will give you power over everyone else. I get it.

What you don't seem to get is a bunch of snowflakes trying to stamp out gays, abortion, women's rights, etc., aren't protecting yourselves from harm, you're inflicting harm on others by imposing your insane beliefs that all others should be like you. In a Representative Democracy like yours, you need only convince enough people that you are in the right to get your wish. Currently some 75% or more of the nation supports those things I just named, so you're going to have to get used to it. Or better yet, move to Russia or Belarus where the like minded folks live.

---

Using science, explain to us how abortion isn't the murdering of an innocent human being.

You won't because it's insane to believe it's not a human being.

Then you can point out a womans "right" to take another innocent life.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

Using science, explain to us how abortion isn't the murdering of an innocent human being.

You won't because it's insane to believe it's not a human being.

Then you can point out a womans "right" to take another innocent life.

---

I don't need to school your ass another time, in another thread on the same topic. Embryos don't have rights. The faaaar right has put more value on a fertilized ovum than they do on a woman, whom they value little more than an incubator. Go brush up on your civil rights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Excellent breakdown of just how criminal Justice Thomas has acted

---

Why do you continue to hate on the black man? Oh that's right, you are a racist pedophile who only see's value in a black person's vote during elections, and nothing else. Want an example or two? Look at Chicago, look at the wasteland of Detroit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Embryos don't have rights.

---

"Black people are not as developed as white human beings so they have no human rights." ~ The same Democrat argument to murder human beings in the womb.

https://media.tenor.com/oeJfkYS9Tx8A...lvin-candy.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

"Black people are not as developed as white human beings so they have no human rights." ~ The same Democrat argument to murder human beings in the womb.

https://media.tenor.com/oeJfkYS9Tx8A...lvin-candy.gif

---

Fun fact. The blood on Leo's hand in that scene is his. He busted a teacup when he smashed his fist on the table and played out the rest of the scene like a pro anyway.

Seran and his ilk:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nm7wmfy3Jc

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhaalizmo

Fun fact. The blood on Leo's hand in that scene is his. He busted a teacup when he smashed his fist on the table and played out the rest of the scene like a pro anyway.

---

Leo is up there with Danial Day-Lewis...almost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

"Black people are not as developed as white human beings so they have no human rights." ~ The same Democrat argument to murder human beings in the womb.

---

Stop it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bhaalizmo

Fun fact. The blood on Leo's hand in that scene is his. He busted a teacup when he smashed his fist on the table and played out the rest of the scene like a pro anyway.

---

https://media.tenor.com/yom09KUlAHcA...fr-vatican.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stop It

Stop it.

---

I agree. Democrats really need to find new arguments to dehumanize people so they can trample on their human rights.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Why yes, we are a Representative Democracy, like it or not our nation was founded on the principle of elections where all it's eligible population votes for it's representatives who lead the nation. Not entirely sure why that frightens you so much, but you need to get your head out of your ass. No matter what way you look at it, you can't fail to see we have a democratically elected government, we vote for our repetitive who in turn lead the nation.

---

Today's score so far:

Apostrophes: 2
Seran: 0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

we vote for our repetitive who in turn lead the nation.

---

Basic grasp of words: 1
Seran: 0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

I don't need to school your ass another time, in another thread on the same topic. Embryos don't have rights. The faaaar right has put more value on a fertilized ovum than they do on a woman, whom they value little more than an incubator. Go brush up on your civil rights.

---

Your ever increasing arrogance for how smart you think you are when you're literally the stupidest person to ever post on the PC keeps getting better and better. But only in an entertainment for others way, which is great for us, but bad for you, because you're still wrong and stupid 100% of the time while trying to blow yourself 24/7.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

How do I explain it.. what the fuck dude, that is in the constitution. Duh.

---

Your response here confirms our type of government.

Ask yourself this: Where is the establishment of, granted power, and defined authority of our government derived from? The answer is the constitution. That takes care of the first part.

A republic already has representative & democratic elements, but the difference is a republic is not held hostage solely to the majority. There is a reason why we have an electoral college that elects our president vs. a popular vote of the people. There is a reason why each state gets the same number (2) of senators as PB pointed out.

I would tell you to educate yourself but I fear that is a lost cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

Your response here confirms our type of government.

Ask yourself this: Where is the establishment of, granted power, and defined authority of our government derived from? The answer is the constitution. That takes care of the first part.

A republic already has representative & democratic elements, but the difference is a republic is not held hostage solely to the majority. There is a reason why we have an electoral college that elects our president vs. a popular vote of the people. There is a reason why each state gets the same number (2) of senators as PB pointed out.

I would tell you to educate yourself but I fear that is a lost cause.

---

And every state gets an apportionment of Representatives according to their population as determined by the Constitutionally mandated census. I don't know why you think that citizens exercising their democratic rights to vote every two, four, and six year intervals for federally elected representatives isn't a Representative Democracy, but you're clearly deluded.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

And every state gets an apportionment of Representatives according to their population as determined by the Constitutionally mandated census. I don't know why you think that citizens exercising their democratic rights to vote every two, four, and six year intervals for federally elected representatives isn't a Representative Democracy, but you're clearly deluded.

---

One half of one branch of government does not make a Representative Democracy.

There is a reason why House members are elected to a 2 year term and Senate enjoy a term that is 3x that.

I get WHY you want to believe it.. so you can use it to change the Senate, SCOTUS and the Electoral College systems.

But, the US is a republic.. and has been since its inception.

Here's the difference:

By definition, a republic is a representative form of government that is ruled according to a charter, or constitution, and a democracy is a government that is ruled according to the will of the majority.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

And every state gets an apportionment of Representatives according to their population as determined by the Constitutionally mandated census. I don't know why you think that citizens exercising their democratic rights to vote every two, four, and six year intervals for federally elected representatives isn't a Representative Democracy, but you're clearly deluded.

---

Let me ask you this in that case… Would you define the government of Nazi Germany to be socialist? After all, it’s both in the name of their political party (nationalist socialist) and they did implement many elements of socialism in their mixed economy. Examples of socialist elements include state funded work programs like the Autobahn & nationalization of industries that included media, healthcare, education & childcare, and many more.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

And every state gets an apportionment of Representatives according to their population as determined by the Constitutionally mandated census. I don't know why you think that citizens exercising their democratic rights to vote every two, four, and six year intervals for federally elected representatives isn't a Representative Democracy, but you're clearly deluded.

---

https://i.imgur.com/lCikwxN.png

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

https://i.imgur.com/lCikwxN.png

---

https://media1.giphy.com/media/dXFKD...giphy.gif&ct=g

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

https://i.imgur.com/lCikwxN.png

---

This is amazing. I especially appreciate that actual retards are included in this round table alliance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

And every state gets an apportionment of Representatives according to their population as determined by the Constitutionally mandated census. I don't know why you think that citizens exercising their democratic rights to vote every two, four, and six year intervals for federally elected representatives isn't a Representative Democracy, but you're clearly deluded.

---

This is what ChatGPT thinks of your statement.

The statement appears to be a defense of the idea that the United States is a representative democracy. However, there are several issues with the statement:


1. The statement incorrectly suggests that the apportionment of Representatives is solely based on the population of each state. While population is a major factor, the apportionment formula also takes into account the total number of seats in the House of Representatives (currently set at 435) and requires that each state has at least one Representative.


2. The statement implies that voting for federally elected representatives every two, four, and six years is the only way citizens can participate in a representative democracy. While voting is an important part of a representative democracy, citizens can also engage with their elected officials through other means such as writing letters, attending town hall meetings, and participating in protests and demonstrations.


3. The statement is dismissive and insulting, referring to someone as "deluded" for holding a different opinion. This type of language is not productive and can prevent meaningful dialogue and understanding.


Overall, while the statement may be well-intentioned, it oversimplifies the complex workings of a representative democracy and does not foster a respectful and constructive conversation.

We better add AI to the round table alliance that agrees Seran is a retard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppressed Poet

We better add AI to the round table alliance that agrees Seran is a retard.

---

https://i.imgur.com/BTrQ5Oy.png

I ran out of people, so I did what I could. :lol:

I just love chatGPT. It has it's flaws of course, but it's amazing how often it's spot on. I use it for checking code, summarizing long documents, hell it just wrote a thank you letter for my wife after an interview and we only had to edit a few minor things.

Mystifying how the far right on this forum have forgotten their social studies lessons and decided our Representative Democracy has to be called something else because we have a Constitution. As of they are mutually exclusive, instead of being mutually inclusive as designed by by the Framers. James Madison and the other social elites were terrified of the idea of the lower class gaining a majority, while at the same time recognized the inherit flaws of the monarchy and aristocracies where so many of our citizens migrated out from under. Hence came the Constitution, which is a statement of unalienable rights, while also being a living document guiding the framework of the United States.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Mystifying how the far right on this forum have forgotten their social studies lessons and decided our Representative Democracy has to be called something else because we have a Constitution. As of they are mutually exclusive, instead of being mutually inclusive as designed by by the Framers. James Madison and the other social elites were terrified of the idea of the lower class gaining a majority, while at the same time recognized the inherit flaws of the monarchy and aristocracies where so many of our citizens migrated out from under. Hence came the Constitution, which is a statement of unalienable rights, while also being a living document guiding the framework of the United States.

---

You should take it up with Bill Gates and tell him about how much smarter than him you are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Mystifying how the far right on this forum have forgotten their social studies lessons and decided our Representative Democracy has to be called something else because we have a Constitution. As of they are mutually exclusive, instead of being mutually inclusive as designed by by the Framers. James Madison and the other social elites were terrified of the idea of the lower class gaining a majority, while at the same time recognized the inherit flaws of the monarchy and aristocracies where so many of our citizens migrated out from under. Hence came the Constitution, which is a statement of unalienable rights, while also being a living document guiding the framework of the United States.

---

There are a few issues with the statement:


1. The statement presents a strawman argument by implying that those on the far right believe that a Representative Democracy cannot coexist with a Constitution, when in fact, many conservatives believe in the importance of both.


2. The statement assumes that the Framers designed the Constitution to include a Representative Democracy, when in fact, the Constitution outlines a variety of government structures and principles beyond just a Representative Democracy. For example, the Constitution includes provisions for a bicameral legislature, an independent judiciary, and a system of checks and balances.


3. The statement suggests that the Framers were primarily concerned with preventing the lower class from gaining a majority, when in fact, they were also concerned with protecting individual rights, limiting the power of the government, and creating a stable and effective system of governance.


4. The statement refers to the Constitution as a "living document," which is a contentious and debated concept. While some believe that the Constitution should be interpreted in light of modern values and societal norms, others believe that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the original intent of the Framers.


Overall, the statement oversimplifies the complex history and principles of the United States Constitution and presents a distorted view of the beliefs and values of those on the far right.

ChatGPT is so based.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

ChatGPT is so based.

---

So based and such versatile use applications. It can simultaneously create:

scripts for the studios while all the writers guild is on strike
speeches for Joe Biden
detailed files of human anatomy to make future T800s more efficient killers
responses to Seran’s post on the PC while highlighting his retardation

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

There are a few issues with the statement:


1. The statement presents a strawman argument by implying that those on the far right believe that a Representative Democracy cannot coexist with a Constitution, when in fact, many conservatives believe in the importance of both.


2. The statement assumes that the Framers designed the Constitution to include a Representative Democracy, when in fact, the Constitution outlines a variety of government structures and principles beyond just a Representative Democracy. For example, the Constitution includes provisions for a bicameral legislature, an independent judiciary, and a system of checks and balances.


3. The statement suggests that the Framers were primarily concerned with preventing the lower class from gaining a majority, when in fact, they were also concerned with protecting individual rights, limiting the power of the government, and creating a stable and effective system of governance.


4. The statement refers to the Constitution as a "living document," which is a contentious and debated concept. While some believe that the Constitution should be interpreted in light of modern values and societal norms, others believe that the Constitution should be interpreted based on the original intent of the Framers.


Overall, the statement oversimplifies the complex history and principles of the United States Constitution and presents a distorted view of the beliefs and values of those on the far right.

---

Seran isn't going to understand any of that, but it won't stop him from replying with a word salad of failure and butthurt anyway, just before he pats himself on the back for how much smarter he thinks he is than everyone else including ChatGPT.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

which is a statement of unalienable rights

---

The first of which is the right to life.

So much for that right, right Seran?

Clown.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neveragain

The first of which is the right to life.

So much for that right, right Seran?

Clown.

---

Only if you're adding amendments which state an embryo has more rights to a womb than the woman whose anatomy is being usurped by an unwanted collection of cells. But I think you're confusing the text of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, a common enough mistake for the uneducated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Only if you're adding amendments which state an embryo has more rights to a womb than the woman whose anatomy is being usurped by an unwanted collection of cells. But I think you're confusing the text of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, a common enough mistake for the uneducated.

---

The statement contains a disrespectful and derogatory remark about the person being addressed, suggesting that they are uneducated for potentially confusing two important documents. It also implies a strong opinion on a controversial issue without providing any evidence or reasoning to support that opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Mystifying how the far right on this forum have forgotten their social studies lessons and decided our Representative Democracy has to be called something else because we have a Constitution. As of they are mutually exclusive, instead of being mutually inclusive as designed by by the Framers. James Madison and the other social elites were terrified of the idea of the lower class gaining a majority, while at the same time recognized the inherit flaws of the monarchy and aristocracies where so many of our citizens migrated out from under. Hence came the Constitution, which is a statement of unalienable rights, while also being a living document guiding the framework of the United States.

---

The only part of our federal government that is a real Representative Democracy is the House of Representatives.

The Senate is not.

The Presidency is not.

The SCOTUS is not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

The only part of our federal government that is a real Representative Democracy is the House of Representatives.

The Senate is not.

The Presidency is not.

The SCOTUS is not.

---

Umm.. wow. Members of Congress and the President are officials elected through direct democratic elections exercising the will of the people as their representatives. Meanwhile, a Supreme Court Justice is a direct appointee of the democratically elected President and confirmed by the Senate. Meanwhile, members of Congress can be recalled by their home state's for failure to exercise the will of the people, while both the President and Supreme Court Justices may be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors by.. wait for it, articles of impeachment drafted by the House!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Umm.. wow. Members of Congress and the President are officials elected through direct democratic elections exercising the will of the people as their representatives. Meanwhile, a Supreme Court Justice is a direct appointee of the democratically elected President and confirmed by the Senate. Meanwhile, members of Congress can be recalled by their home state's for failure to exercise the will of the people, while both the President and Supreme Court Justices may be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors by.. wait for it, articles of impeachment drafted by the House!

---

The statement contains a few inaccuracies:


- Supreme Court Justices are not direct appointees of the President. The President nominates them, but they must be confirmed by the Senate.
- Members of Congress cannot be recalled by their home state, at least not under federal law. Some states have recall provisions for state officials, but not for federal officials.
- While it is true that both the President and Supreme Court Justices can be impeached, the process for each is different. The House of Representatives drafts articles of impeachment for both, but only the Senate can hold a trial and remove the President from office. For Supreme Court Justices, the Senate serves as both judge and jury.

Seran, my dude. It's so easy to just paste your word salad into chatGPT and it'll help correct all your retarded "thoughts".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Only if you're adding amendments which state an embryo has more rights to a womb than the woman whose anatomy is being usurped by an unwanted collection of cells. But I think you're confusing the text of the Declaration of Independence and the United States Constitution, a common enough mistake for the uneducated.

---

You have a real hard time with science.

Can't have a "mass of cells" if it's not life. It's no other life than human life, thus, that human life has a right to life that is protected under the constitution.

Only really dumb, selfish and evil people believe otherwise and should be removed from humanity, just like the slave owners.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Umm.. wow. Members of Congress and the President are officials elected through direct democratic elections exercising the will of the people as their representatives. Meanwhile, a Supreme Court Justice is a direct appointee of the democratically elected President and confirmed by the Senate. Meanwhile, members of Congress can be recalled by their home state's for failure to exercise the will of the people, while both the President and Supreme Court Justices may be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors by.. wait for it, articles of impeachment drafted by the House!

---

If the Senate were a true representation of the population of every state, then California would have more than Wyoming. They both have 2.

If the President was a true representation of the population of every state, then there would be no Electoral Collage.

If the SCOTUS was a true representation of the population of every state, they would be elected BY the people of the states, not nominated by the President who is elected by the Electoral College and voted on by the Senate.

Please stop being retarded to just be retarded in every fucking post you make.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

If the Senate were a true representation of the population of every state, then California would have more than Wyoming. They both have 2.

If the President was a true representation of the population of every state, then there would be no Electoral Collage.

If the SCOTUS was a true representation of the population of every state, they would be elected BY the people of the states, not nominated by the President who is elected by the Electoral College and voted on by the Senate.

Please stop being retarded to just be retarded in every fucking post you make.

---

What's particularly retarded about your statement is you falsely assume Representation is equal. What part of the Constitution outlining the number of representatives confuses you? What part of the electoral college stymies your ability to understand that states do not have equal voices in either? Do you not understand anything about the House of Representatives? The structure of the House and Senate are /completely/ different and yet the methodology to be elected is the same. Winning at the ballot of their district or state through a democratic election. That's how a democracy works bro, if you don't understand the differences then you really ought to bow out of the conversation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

What's particularly retarded about your statement is you falsely assume Representation is equal. What part of the Constitution outlining the number of representatives confuses you? What part of the electoral college stymies your ability to understand that states do not have equal voices in either? Do you not understand anything about the House of Representatives? The structure of the House and Senate are /completely/ different and yet the methodology to be elected is the same. Winning at the ballot of their district or state through a democratic election. That's how a democracy works bro, if you don't understand the differences then you really ought to bow out of the conversation.

---

Clue#1: You keep referring back to this thing called the Constitution.
Clue #2: When you first suggested that the US is a Representative Democracy, you used the House of Representatives as an example. It only worked for the House of Representatives.
Clue #3: I gave you the definitions of Representative Democracy and a Republic.

Let's ask ChatGPT:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ChatGPT

If I had to choose between the two, I would say that the United States is a republic. While it is true that the United States is a representative democracy, the term "republic" more accurately describes the United States' form of government.In a republic, power is held by the people or their elected representatives, rather than by a monarch or other hereditary ruler. The United States operates as a federal republic, with power divided between the federal government and the individual states. The Constitution establishes a system of checks and balances, in which the three branches of government - the legislative, executive, and judicial - have separate powers and responsibilities.
While the United States is also a representative democracy, this term does not fully capture the complexities of the country's government structure. The term "republic" emphasizes the importance of a written constitution, the rule of law, and the role of elected representatives in governing the country.

---

Now, I can either believe you.. someone who is never correct about anything.. or I can believe an artificial intelligence program.

I'm going with the one who is not the reigning Retard Champion.

Sorry.

It's alright PB, I accept your defeat no matter how in graciously you depart the conversation. Maybe one day you can repeat a social studies course, learn the definition of democracy and come to understand we vote in elections in this country. Idiot

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

It's alright PB, I accept your defeat no matter how in graciously you depart the conversation. Maybe one day you can repeat a social studies course, learn the definition of democracy and come to understand we vote in elections in this country. Idiot

---

You have never defeated anyone.. unless it's a battle of the skidmarks.

Retard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

The statement contains a few inaccuracies:


- Supreme Court Justices are not direct appointees of the President. The President nominates them, but they must be confirmed by the Senate.
- Members of Congress cannot be recalled by their home state, at least not under federal law. Some states have recall provisions for state officials, but not for federal officials.
- While it is true that both the President and Supreme Court Justices can be impeached, the process for each is different. The House of Representatives drafts articles of impeachment for both, but only the Senate can hold a trial and remove the President from office. For Supreme Court Justices, the Senate serves as both judge and jury.

---

It's a common enough mistake for the uneducated like Seran.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

It's alright PB, I accept your defeat no matter how in graciously you depart the conversation. Maybe one day you can repeat a social studies course, learn the definition of democracy and come to understand we vote in elections in this country. Idiot

---

Your extreme coping lately has been fantastic. Not for you, but for everyone else reading it.

The arrogance and lack of self awareness behind it while still being wrong and stupid 100% of the time just makes it all that much better.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Seran, my dude. It's so easy to just paste your word salad into chatGPT and it'll help correct all your retarded "thoughts".

---

You should do this with every post he makes just for keks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

You have never defeated anyone.. unless it's a battle of the skidmarks.

Retard.

---

He has also defeated every retard who has ever posted here before him, so badly that he made Backlash look like Stephen Hawking.

https://i.imgur.com/V1fLHGm.jpeg

Justice Alito is taking his turn for both failing to disclose a prior six figure gift from a wealthy conservative individual which had business before the Supreme Court. Justice Alito could have saved himself a lot of trouble disclosing the massive gift, but now he's defending himself in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece trying to downplay the gift, his relationship with the billionaire and trying to difusd the implication he's been bought and paid for.

Quote:

---

Justice Alito accepted Alaska resort vacation from GOP donors, report says

WASHINGTON (AP) — Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito accepted a 2008 trip to a luxury fishing lodge in Alaska from two wealthy Republican donors, one of whom repeatedly had interests before the court, and he did not disclose the trips on his financial disclosure for that year, ProPublica reports.

A story published late Tuesday by the nonprofit investigative journalism organization states that in July 2008 Alito flew to a remote corner of Alaska aboard the private plane of businessman and Republican donor, Paul Singer. A hedge fund founded by the billionaire has brought roughly a dozen cases before the court since then, ProPublica reported. Alito did not recuse himself from participating in any of those cases.

Alito’s three-day stay at the King Salmon Lodge was paid for by another wealthy donor, Robin Arkley II, the owner of a mortgage company then based in California. Leonard Leo, then a leader of the conservative legal group The Federalist Society, helped make arrangements for the trip, including securing a spot for Alito aboard Singer’s jet, which would have cost Alito at least $100,000 if he chartered the jet himself, ProPublica reported.

https://apnews.com/article/alito-sup...7595428fd7619c

---

oh no, he went on vacation 15 years ago, whatever shall we ddo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Justice Alito is taking his turn for both failing to disclose a prior six figure gift from a wealthy conservative individual which had business before the Supreme Court. Justice Alito could have saved himself a lot of trouble disclosing the massive gift, but now he's defending himself in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece trying to downplay the gift, his relationship with the billionaire and trying to difusd the implication he's been bought and paid for.

---

ProPublica... yikes...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Justice Alito is taking his turn for both failing to disclose a prior six figure gift from a wealthy conservative individual which had business before the Supreme Court. Justice Alito could have saved himself a lot of trouble disclosing the massive gift, but now he's defending himself in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece trying to downplay the gift, his relationship with the billionaire and trying to difusd the implication he's been bought and paid for.

---

lol @ you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

Justice Alito is taking his turn for both failing to disclose a prior six figure gift from a wealthy conservative individual which had business before the Supreme Court. Justice Alito could have saved himself a lot of trouble disclosing the massive gift, but now he's defending himself in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece trying to downplay the gift, his relationship with the billionaire and trying to difusd the implication he's been bought and paid for.

---

When travel such as this happens it’s billed under a SIFL (Standard Industry Fare Level) rate. The company providing the flight will send the passenger the tax bill for this. So it’s not a huge secret as Alito reported it on this tax return for that year. I would link you some information on SIFL so you can educate yourself, but feel that will be a waste of my time to do so.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seizer

When travel such as this happens it’s billed under a SIFL (Standard Industry Fare Level) rate. The company providing the flight will send the passenger the tax bill for this. So it’s not a huge secret as Alito reported it on this tax return for that year. I would link you some information on SIFL so you can educate yourself, but feel that will be a waste of my time to do so.

---

That would mean that ProPublica would be purposely leaving this information out to publish a "GOTCHA!" story on a Conservative Justice.. which makes no sense, since ProPublica touts itself as a "ProPublica is an independent, nonprofit newsroom that produces investigative journalism with moral force. We dig deep into important issues, shining a light on abuses of power and betrayals of public trust — and we stick with those issues as long as it takes to hold power to account."

Oh wait.. they only do anti-Republican and pro-Democrat pieces...

So weird.

Always a victim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alfster

Always a victim

---

Willfully ignorant is your best case scenario at this point, Alfster.

Or maybe you subscribe that ProPublica is an unbiased site that only has the interest in the truth and doesn't drive a PROgressive agenda?

Please say that is the case... because that would be entertaining for me.

We are...amused....by this entire thread.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seizer

When travel such as this happens it’s billed under a SIFL (Standard Industry Fare Level) rate. The company providing the flight will send the passenger the tax bill for this. So it’s not a huge secret as Alito reported it on this tax return for that year. I would link you some information on SIFL so you can educate yourself, but feel that will be a waste of my time to do so.

---

LOL you moron, he didn't pay for the trip of disclose it is the point. Following these secret, six figure trips he was given he heard multiple cases where he had a heretofore unknown relationship with someone who had a financial interest in the outcome. Bribery by any other name is still bribery.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

LOL you moron, he didn't pay for the trip of disclose it is the point. Following these secret, six figure trips he was given he heard multiple cases where he had a heretofore unknown relationship with someone who had a financial interest in the outcome. Bribery by any other name is still bribery.

---

Amazing how none of this comes to light until Democrats lose the supreme court.

I'm sure you're OK with Democrat bribes though. Oh, that's right, you keep ignoring the Biden crime syndicate and go on your bigoted anti-Christian rants every time it gets mentioned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

LOL you moron, he didn't pay for the trip of disclose it is the point. Following these secret, six figure trips he was given he heard multiple cases where he had a heretofore unknown relationship with someone who had a financial interest in the outcome. Bribery by any other name is still bribery.

---

Bro it was 2008. Every man was buying TiVos with their bonuses & making it rain on those hoes with TARP money. Don’t be a playa hatin’ biatch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Seran

LOL you moron, he didn't pay for the trip of disclose it is the point. Following these secret, six figure trips he was given he heard multiple cases where he had a heretofore unknown relationship with someone who had a financial interest in the outcome. Bribery by any other name is still bribery.

---

It was 2008.

Seriously, if you have to go back over a decade to play "GOTCHA!" you aren't playing.. you're praying.