Clarence Thomas Under Pressure to Recuse Himself From Donald Trump Case
Clarence Thomas Under Pressure to Recuse Himself From Donald Trump Case
The U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to look at whether the Republican former president is immune from federal prosecution.
Hmmm...any guesses if he actually will? Cause I bet there is zero chance that he does.
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.
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?
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
Well it was about that time when I noticed that Clarence Thomas was about 8 stories tall and not a Supreme Court Judge after all, but the Lochness monster!
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?
One-way tickets to Guantanamo for everyone!
I honestly don't think the more recent "conservative" additions save gorsich actually would care if he did. They'd ride off rich into the sunset as "prestigious" SCOTUS members.
if they were gonna retire rich on billionaire donor money they would have already done it. look at Corrupt Clarence: as long as he's sitting on the bench he can count on thousand dollar/day vacations and he knows that. As soon as he has nothing to offer his billionaire owners they'll pull up stakes and move on the bribing the next justice.
sitting president is a democrat
That would matter if the sitting president had some conviction beyond the status quo. He doesn't, and if they declare Trump is above the law, Biden will staunchly refuse to take advantage of that power...because, reasons.
The D's inaction is what got us here. I don't expect that to change in the next 12 months.
there's an inherent conflict in democrats where they want to be politicians while appearing to be above politics and what it ends up meaning is abandoning any position that's challenged by the opposition as "political", "divisive" or "agenda-driven". they're rich, coddled cowards.
with that being said, I feel like in most cases Rs are politically adroit enough to pull the ladder up behind them even when they don't think Ds will bother trying to climb it.
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.
There is no democracy, Hilary got more votes in 2016.
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.
Luckily the three on the court already don't actually owe him shit. I don't have a lot of faith in them, but once on the court, they will be there forever, no matter what the orange poo ball says or does.
The orange garbage can may think they'll be loyal to him, but we all know that loyalty only works one way with him.
Again my faith in these three is lowwwwww, but it's not a given that they rule in his favor.
Don't underestimate the power of stochastic terrorism. They may not owe him anything, but they have a pretty good idea of what he'll do if they rule against him. They're corrupt, not stupid.
Nasty nicknames and accusations of disloyalty will be followed by imprecations for someone to rid him of these turbulent justices, and the next thing they know they're facing some wacko with a baseball bat.
the three on the court already don't actually owe him shit. I don't have a lot of faith in them, but once on the court, they will be there forever, no matter what the orange poo ball says or does.
True, but you're forgetting the millions if not tens or even hundreds of millions worth of various bribes go away if they're no longer considered "loyal" to the Mango Mussolini.
They didn't get to or near the top of those Federalist Society lists by NOT being corrupt as fuck, after all..
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.
*shouldn't. Hopefully
Definitely a shouldn’t!
I wonder if Coke Can Clarence will suddenly find a set of morals.
Narrator: He didn't.
lol fuck you.
Clarence Thomas's official statement in regards to this
Like he remotely understands the concept of ethics.
Oh, come now. He understands it perfectly, and thinks it's not worth wiping his ass with.
Hehehehe 🤣🤣😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣 hahahhahaha
Sweet summer child, thank you. I needed a good laugh
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.
Watch Thomas cite this as precedent and hide behind it:
Whateva! He does what he wans!
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
This is the best summary I could come up with:
U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Clarence Thomas is facing pressure to recuse himself from a case determining whether Donald Trump can claim presidential immunity from prosecution in a federal indictment against him.
Trump made the argument in relation to a federal case accusing him of attempting to overturn the results of the 2020 election in the run-up to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
In December 2022, she was questioned by a committee investigating the January 6 riot after reports that she had texted White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows, urging him to continue challenging the election results.
"This issue will shape our democracy & ethnically & morally, Clarence Thomas recusing himself is the responsible thing to do — for public trust in the Court's decision.
Democrat content creator Harry Sisson wrote: "Clarence Thomas must recuse himself from any and all cases involving Donald Trump and the 2020 election.
Meanwhile, Trump's campaign reacted to the Supreme Court decision by accusing Smith of trying to rush a "witch hunt" in a press statement.
The original article contains 693 words, the summary contains 176 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Pond scum. I take that back actually, even scum is useful.
He would if he wasn't corrupt. If.
Let’s go fishing
This would be a lot of effort for a 5-3 decision.