Hmmm...any guesses if he actually will? Cause I bet there is zero chance that he does.
this post was submitted on 13 Dec 2023
816 points (98.5% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3194 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I can't imagine he will, nor will any of the justices appointed by Trump.
he didn't recuse himself when his wife was on the docket... so why would he recuse himself from trump?
Exactly.
Can we at least update the description of Supreme Court Justice to remove impartiality and instead say something to the effect of 'forces their will on people less fortunate?'
Also, call them judges. To call them justices perverts the entire concept.
load more comments
(5 replies)
Well he’s a giant piece of shit human, so I’m going to guess no.
I don't see any chance the supreme court could rule that he would be immune to charges for attempting to steal an election. If they were to rule he had absolute immunity it would be giving every president forward who wants to stay in office the right to just cancel the elections.
That said, Clarence won't want his name listed as voting against protecting little hands in this, so him stepping aside gives him the ability to not vote against, and look like he did the right thing.
Quite clearly the Supreme Court doesn't care about national stability. So who can say what will happen. They've overturned decades of jurisprudence, so speculation is fun but we really have no idea.
They already showed how it's done in Bush v Gore: just declare the case can't be used as precedent.
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(3 replies)
I'm gonna put the odds at roughly 1000:1 that he does.
Actually, there are betting sites for this that would be, supposedly, more accurate than I am at creating those odds. What are the odds on the betting sites?
Edit: I'm not finding the odds.....
Edit 2: Apparently there are 5:1 odds on if Trump takes a plea bargain. I would have set those a bit higher since he is willing to settle cases, but I doubt he's willing to accept jail time of any sort.
I can't see trump taking a plea deal while he's still running for president. He's going to try to delay as long as he can, get elected, and then use his position as president to weasel out of any charges, even if it means pardoning himself. And since he's that number 1 target, the one that they want bad enough to give lenient plea deals to others in exchange for testimony, I find it hard to believe that he'd be offered a plea that doesn't send him to prison. So why admit to being guilty when he can keep telling his followers that it's a witch hunt and generate more support?
Clarence Thomas: "Fuck you, I don't have to answer to anyone. I'm a Supreme Court Justice. I am the law."
I upvoted because I could actually hear the words being said as I read that 😂
load more comments
(2 replies)
Judge Dred(ed)
I don't even have to think about clicking on that link to know with absolute certainty that Clarence Thomas isn't under any pressure whatsoever.
He's rubbing his hands together thinking about the payday coming his way.
How much is that recusal worth to you?
Is it, say, "new RV" worth it? Or perhaps, maybe it's "buy my mother a house" worth it?
Clarence is for sale, so let the bidding begin!
Unfortunately a regular American so I can only offer him about $3.50.
Easy there money bags
load more comments
(1 replies)
the court is openly, blatantly corrupt. I see no reason that should stop for this case in particular. being said, I also see no reason they would rule in favor of trump. he made a mistake that not many power brokers survive: he's depending on favors he's done for the justices in the past in getting them nominated rather than on what he can do for them in the future, and he's essentially said out loud that he's gonna consolidate all power including theirs in the office of PotUS if elected again. They'll let him coup us, but I don't think they'll let him coup them and I highly doubt they'll declare the president completely above the law while the sitting president is a democrat.
I highly doubt they'll declare the president completely above the law while the sitting president is a democrat.
I'm imagining a scenario where they do that and then Biden immediately orders drive strikes on the Republican justices, because why the hell not?
load more comments
(1 replies)
I highly doubt they’ll declare the president completely above the law while the sitting president is a democrat.
That wouldn't stop them because they know that good is dumb.
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(6 replies)
Spoiler alert: He won't.
I'm sure he'll get right on that.
My take is this, and bear with me until the end; The Court is wildly conservative, not partisan. They're not on Trump's side. They owe him nothing.
See, once you're in for life, who gives a fuck? And that's very much the idea behind lifetime appointments. Sucks now, but I'm still down for it. Would we rather they be susceptible to political winds? (I'll take a Justice for all 12 circuit courts, at the least, please and thank you.)
Another thing that gets discounted, because they're in for life they owe nothing except to their legal legacy, their history. Most Justices, even the ones you hate, take this very, very seriously. Can't go any higher, their legacy is all they have left to define their life's work.
Thomas OTOH, is the most blatantly corrupt Justice I've seen in life, and I ain't a young 'un. This animal only cares about getting paid, no regard for his legacy, no shame. I see no reason or way he can be pressured out.
See, once you're in for life, who gives a fuck?
Exactly, so if you're a corrupt conservative POS - per your own argument, who gives a fuck? There is no reality in which these justices are held accountable, and if they were they'll have made enough cash to still sit pretty for life.
Sure, they're not partisan, but the forces funneling money and gifts into their pockets are.
They're partisan as fuck at the moment
The court is for sale. It's a hog trough. I don't think any of them give a fuck about their reputations.
Clarence Thomas might as well be Falstaff:
"Can honour set to a leg? no: or an arm? no: or take away the grief of a wound? no. Honour hath no skill in surgery, then? no. What is honour? a word. What is in that word honour? what is that honour? air. A trim reckoning! Who hath it? he that died o’ Wednesday. Doth he feel it? no. Doth he hear it? no. ‘Tis insensible, then. Yea, to the dead. But will it not live with the living? no. Why? detraction will not suffer it. Therefore I’ll none of it. Honour is a mere scutcheon: and so ends my catechism."
(Henry IV part 1 act V scene 1)
They still need their conservative allies in the lower courts and conservative funding to get their purpose made cases to make it up to SCOTUS. But, I think you're right. Those colluding conservative legal forces aren't MAGA fanatics. They just used the movement as a means to an end.
However, the MAGA base is ultimately a force they don't want to piss off directly. They're domestic terrorists, and death threats their favorite currency.
These cowards got twisted in a knot when they were publicly ostracized after revoking women's rights. Imagine how they would receive more than well deserved mean words.
His wife was involved in Jan 6th.
If he doesn't, democracy is dead. Even if he votes against trump. Legitimacy is gone.
load more comments
(37 replies)
I mean, of course! His own wife was one of the co-conspirators!
What about the 3 people on the court who owe their cushy lifetime gig to him, though? The ones whose legal bribes still depend on his rabid following approving of them? Does anyone really think that they don't have a conflict of interest?
Btw, that Newsweek fairness meter? By conflating left-right political views with fairness, it ironically reinforces the common misconception that a centrist perspective equals fairness, incentivising any reporter of theirs who cares about the meter to adopt a centrist point of view, thus making their reporting less fair and objective.
load more comments
(5 replies)
When has Clarence Thomas ever done the right thing? When do people think he will ever act properly under pressure?
POS won't recuse. POS will write an opinion letting Cheeto chimp off the hook. My fingers crossed he's in minority.
He won't because he's corrupt.
"Recuse yourself!"
"And if I don't?"
"We'll furrow our brows and be very concerned!"
He should retire. Sugar baby Clarence has zero integrity and shouldn’t be on any court.
lol fuck you.
Clarence Thomas's official statement in regards to this
I wonder if Coke Can Clarence will suddenly find a set of morals.
I'm sure that giant shit stain will do the right thing
As if the Supreme Court had some sort of Code of Ethics or something.
Hehehehe 🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣 hahahhahaha
Sweet summer child, thank you. I needed a good laugh
Watch Thomas cite this as precedent and hide behind it:
Yeah, no. I am not recusing myself. That new Code of Ethics we have? It's all a big suggestion. I plan on taking those suggestions and put them straight into the garbage can. - Clarence Thomas
Whateva! He does what he wans!
view more: next ›