447 Comments

The Grifter and Chief’s party, The Republican Party is slowly taking our Freedoms and tearing apart our Institutions. Hopefully I’m not the only one that is seeing this! We are losing our democracy to white supremacy.U.S. Rep. Summer Lee (D-PA) called what happened in Tennessee “straight up fascism in its ugliest, most racist form.”The Congressional Black

Caucus released a statement saying the ouster of Jones and Pearson “makes clear that racism is alive and well in Tennessee. President Joe Biden also weighed in on the matter Thursday: "Three kids and three officials gunned down in yet another mass shooting. And what are GOP officials focused on? Punishing lawmakers who joined thousands of peaceful protesters calling for action,"MAGA Republicans in Congress…are threatening to wreak havoc on our economy with debt limit brinkmanship. Their extreme agenda would send the unprecedented investments we’ve made here in America—along with the jobs that come with it—overseas. And it’s all to pay for even more giveaways to the wealthiest Americans and largest corporations.

Expand full comment

The right-wing couldn’t take away anything if we had unrigged the system that they rigged! Better late than never! Help out at movetoamend.org

Expand full comment

Rigging elections has the limits of candidacy of the elected hack. But what the Trump/MAGA right did that's harder to undo is load the justice system, including SCOTUS, with younger right wing (Catholic) old school-thinking judges that will overturn progress. We've already seen them at work from SCOTUS and Roe to Fed judges and Trump's docs.

Expand full comment

Keith; please don’t castigate all Catholics when describing the few on the Supreme Court. They are more of an aberration than normal every day Catholic citizens.

Expand full comment

Sorry Nancy to offend your faith, but Catholic religion is the worst for Christian right-wing agendas, and anti-abortion. My home state of Iowa has no stopped rape victims from getting the Plan B pill, I guess they want them to carry the rapist's baby to term? All but one on the Supreme Court are right-wing religious nut jobs. Sorry, I wish it was just the person, but this religion plays a heavy role in their agenda.

Expand full comment
founding

Check out the bastilleamendment.org for an amendment idea and an income tax calculation.

Expand full comment

Signed, Thank You

Expand full comment

Racism ? it's alive all over this country, but mostly suppressed by what ever community one may live in. Ignorance is prevalent at all levels, because I was 'exposed' today at an event I attended

where someone said they don't watch/listen to the/any news - - -- sadness - for this can fortel the future of - not only our nation - but the ONLY planet we have to live on !~ ~ ~

i.e. = A.I.A. = arrogance, ignorance & apathy (willful) and apathy toward stepping out of ones own sorry-ass pathetic little life -- -- - - and actually thinking about - why ? someone IS homeless or needs other assistance - in whatever form is is offered or comes ~ ~ ~ ~

Expand full comment

Racism never left Tennessee; racism has never left the south--it's just hidden, slightly below the surface.

Expand full comment

Racism is everywhere.

As a white male from the Boston area, I remember spending a spring break in the mid-80's in Texas in the Houston, Galveston and Austin areas. During my first real trip to the South, I noticed the racism was more overt, not as submerged as where I grew up. The North likes to think its not racist, but that's not true at all.

It took that trip to show me my racism and how other people show theirs.

As Dr. Who (Tom Baker's) said "Travel broadens the mind."

Expand full comment

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/opinion/anti-cancel-culture-republicans-in-hiding-after-expulsion-of-tennessee-lawmakers/ar-AA19BVvo

There's a reason 1984 keeps being brought up. Starting to hear some "Brave New World" references, too. See my comment from yesterday's discussion.

Expand full comment

Thanks! I’ve been telling people to read Brave New World since the trump was installed! It’s chilling!!!

Expand full comment
Apr 8, 2023·edited Apr 8, 2023

A little something just for you that you may enjoy. My apology to anyone who's already seen it:

"The poor are always with us" - an old saying amongst the privileged, and they damn-well intend seeing to it that it >remains that way<. The legend is that it motivates people to work instead of doing nothing. Dr Reich discusses the "structural economic trends." "Who's getting what?" - a traditional structural/functionalist approach. I'm interested in how those trends operate, upon what they're based.

"History happens today:"

- LAWRENCE: HISTORIC OUTING OF BLACK TN DEMOCRATS:

https://youtu.be/iXA2UA8Mc1M -

A literary critique of oligarchy

- DO WE LIVE IN A BRAVE NEW WORLD? ALDOUS HUXLEY'S WARNING:

https://youtu.be/aPkQ57cXrPA - the soft sciences,"... a cluster of scientific disciplines...including psychology, psychiatry, sociology, social psychology, anthropology, ... biology ... economic and political science... [and to work out the numbers] mathematics and statistics." - an arsenal of double-edged swords.

Happening now: "Association and Society Management:" https://www.asmii.com/ - for example.

Another critique of an alternate view of the same thing:

- IS 1984 BECOMING A REALITY? GEORGE ORWELL'S WARNING:

https://youtu.be/wf0rxNIOz4M - "Oligarchical collectivism" == Corporate welfare.

Remember when ol' Tweety re-marked the hurricane track, attempting to dictate the weather?

Apply that to:

- WHAT PUTIN LEARNED FROM THE KGB . . .:

https://youtu.be/wf0rxNIOz4M

Was ol' Tweety's birtherism the first shot when a black man became president? You decide. Who was ol' Tweety's old friend. What part of the world has he seemed to like marrying into?

Dr Reich speaks of historic trend, and ====> History [is Happening] Today - even as we post our comments.

Expand full comment

yes, I"ve read 1984 and "took it to heart' - BUt I do have personal experiences where 'clients' have not lived - down - to that retoric - - -

- clients who have the means to support me in my own 'decline ' (both physically and mentally) and have supported me though my own - trauma -

It all depends on the' mental propensities of the 'rich and famous' -- - - - - - - - - -

Expand full comment

That’s great! I’ll vote for you!!! You have a smart head on your shoulders. You see the pink elephant in the room. Kudos!

Expand full comment

The Supreme Court needs a code of ethics.

Expand full comment

... and an enforcement mechanism.

Expand full comment

I'm still flabbergasted that there is no code of ethics for the highest court in the land...

Expand full comment

Unbelievable, isn’t it?

Expand full comment

No deliberate !!!

Expand full comment

Kinda scandalous that it doesn't, don't you think? I can remember when Abe Fortas resigned after public pressure over matters much smaller than those posed by several of today's Justices. Clarence Thomas clearly assumes he's protected, and when you see what the wife of Chief Justice Roberts is up to, you can understand why.

Expand full comment

How about Clarence's traitor wife?

Expand full comment

Astoundingly ignorant; an embarrassment to the Court (you'd think).

Expand full comment

Mr. Thomas, although lacking in moral judgment, really did nothing wrong. The justices are under a different level of scrutiny then the normal elected officials. No matter how wrong his actions appear they still don't stand as a form of impropriety. His wife on the other hand deserves a closer inspection. That woman has more worms than a bucket of bad apples. Between Her and Sidney Powell they give women a bad name. In the future I would hope the justices are looked at in the same light as the other politicians with regard to gifts and the reporting of same.

Expand full comment

Donald, I respectfully disagree with your take on Justice Thomas. He disclosed similar gifts of varying value in the past. LA Times did an exposé years ago about the source of those gifts and after it ran, he stopped disclosure. He claims he was counseled he didn't have to file and disclose his gifts, but the timing of discontinuation is extremely convenient and he has not disclosed who this counsel came from. His actions are unethical, wrong, noncompliant with filing requirements and in direct conflict with impartial jurisprudence.

Expand full comment

C.--I totally agree Thomas's actions were unethical but my point was he didn't have to report any thing because of the way the rules are set up. Until we force their hand the justices are living in a gray area.

Expand full comment

Thomas would like us all to think so. Please check this excerpt:

Justin Elliott, one of the report authors, said: “This is the text of the law ethics lawyers told us he violated. Gifts – such as private jet travel – need to be reported, unless they are ‘food, lodging, or entertainment received as personal hospitality’. This is in the statute itself and predates the recent filing guidance update.”

Full article: https://www.theguardian.com/law/2023/apr/07/clarence-thomas-statement-undisclosed-gifts-supreme-court

Expand full comment

C.--The justices who occupy positions on the Supreme Court are subject to attempted bribery just like anyone else, there for they need to be regulated by the same guide lines that the elected official fall under. As it is now, from what I've heard and read, they can accept gifts and gratuities with any actual law governing the disclosure of such items. This must change. Weak minds fall prey to expensive things, and because of this political positions can be altered.

Expand full comment

I didn't know that; I scratch my head because I thought they all had to be lawyers and therefore subject to a certain code of conduct. More research for me.

Expand full comment

M.--A good mind never stops learning.

Expand full comment

He's a POS.

Expand full comment

I wrote a novela to make a compelling argument against Thomas and you achieved the same result in a short sentence. I'm signing up for your composition brevity class.

Expand full comment

I believe you are on to something here. I suspect Clarence the puppet of Ginny. Almost impossible is to ID those she listens to and find gentle ways to make things inconvenient for them. Most high up people are addicted to convenience and luxury problems. C’mon guys! Kick those noggins into gear! Who knows who nose who knows her ?

Expand full comment

Z-- Well said

Expand full comment

DH: I can see you have a gift. If you can with the time you have, USE IT MORE!

Expand full comment

Z--To what end if I may ask.

Expand full comment

Kinds makes me think you don't need a Supreme Court when it's so easily corrupted !!!

Expand full comment

What is she up to? I would like to know for knowledge’s sake.

Expand full comment

Abe Fortas? Wow, a name from the past (and I thought I was old).

Expand full comment

They need both term limits AND a code of ethics w/ an enforcement mechanism.

Expand full comment

Limit Supremes to two 9 year terms. Also, limit other federal judges. No more lifetime appointments.

Expand full comment

The purpose of lifetime tenure for judges is to give them freedom from politics. They need a code of ethics and a means to enforce it, not limited tenure.

Expand full comment

I respectfully disagree. The average life span what much less in 1800. Lifetime tenure gives them freedom from consequence. Now, the strategy is to get the youngest person you can confirmed. It would also prevent Justices from "timing" their retirement like Kennedy did. Thomas has been on for 30+ years.

Expand full comment

And that has been too damn long!!!

Expand full comment

30 years? OMG, that is an affront to justice. He was clearly guilty of harassing Ms. Hill. The whole trial was a fiasco and President Biden should feel more shame.

Expand full comment

20 years on the court is enough.

Expand full comment

I agree that the logic behind the lifetime appointment is to 'reduce' the politics behind their appointment. I won't say eliminate as that's impossible. The absolute lack of oversight and ethics that are imposed upon lesser courts is unforgivable and unconscionable.

Expand full comment

Politics was absolutely in the mix when the judges were chosen. How does that frame of reference melt away when they are in office? Otherwise the Federalist Society wouldn't be so invested in the picking of them.

Expand full comment

I never said politics is not part of the mix. I said in theory it *reduced* the politics in theory as once in office one isn't up for reelection every *x* years and having to justify their position(s) to be reelected. Yes Federal Judgeships over time have become very politicized.

Expand full comment

I don’t get the so-called logic. People become more political as time goes on, not more objective. Plus, they get all those bribes, e.g., Clarence Thompson ( Rita Hill should have kicked him out long ago, but you know she’s a woman & the old, white men want to rule). The more time, the more they get away with, arrogance increases, etc.

Expand full comment

That's why stringent ethical standards must be imposed on the justices. This is the US Supreme Court, after all. It should be beyond reproach. It obviously isn't now, & imposing term limits won't change that. Kavanaugh & ACB are both incompetent & unethical although they haven't been there that long.

Expand full comment

I meant Clarence Thomas, of course😁. I goofed.

Expand full comment

Nope, they need term limits. It's obvious after Thomas's hearing in 1991 the idea of justices being free from politics, as if they ever where, was over.

Term limits are a good idea but I would say three six year terms would a good limit. Which should also be the limit for the Senate.

Expand full comment

I think two terms should be enough. Plus they should be prohibited from becoming lobbyists after serving!

Expand full comment

How long are the terms? If it would be the same as the Senate that would be 12 years. The problem here is the terms are short you could end up with more chaos. The other issues is how dark money, think the Federalist Society, is a huge problem. The Democrats have not been paying attention to the courts while the Republicans have been laser focused on them for decades. That's why we now have a 6 seat extreme right wing majority on the SCOTUS. The Republicans have always said exactly what they would do if they gained a majority on the SCOTUS. Democrats chose to ignore that. As I've said before, this is on the Democrats for being asleep at the wheel when it comes to the judiciary.

Expand full comment

Go here! And sign up! And get involved. And get others involved. We are at the precipice, and in great danger of falling. Sign up! https://www.termlimits.com

Expand full comment

Well said!!!

Expand full comment

There is no freedom from politics. That's kind of a fantasy.

Expand full comment

True, but the job of a judge is to be neutral. Good judges actually behave that way.

Expand full comment

Yes, I've known some.

Expand full comment

That may be the truth:

"Just because you don't take an interest in politics doesn't mean politics won't take an interest in you."

~ Pericles

It's impossible for a human to be purely objective. If a color blind person seriously claims that red is green, then for her it must be. In that case, truth is subjectivity, as Kierkegaard said. Judge Thomas sees no problem in enjoying free luxury vacations paid for by wealthy people; therefore, to him, there's no problem. But most of us see things differently: There is indeed a problem, a big problem, one that needs to be redressed immediately.

Politics and government should be ethical social action. (Problem is, we disagree on our codes of ethics: Where and when do you draw the line?)

Expand full comment

James Muncy ; Certainly the line should be drawn before a problem becomes as glaringly evident in more than one way, as we see now, with Justice Thomas ; not only with the lavish gifts, but influence his wife has in another sphere, because of her powerful, unethical husband. One surefire way to tell if candidates are acceptable is if they misrepresent their intent in their hearings, like saying abortion rights are "settled law", suggesting that they would never tamper with or reverse the law, only to then follow obvious party agendas and change the law against the will of the majority of voters. If that isn't perjury, then there is really another language devoid of ethics in "legalese"! So CON -venient!

Expand full comment

Good rejoinder, and I think you are more correct than I am: According to Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), the wicked should not prosper because the world would be better if they faced some penalty. [Of course, who defines what wicked is? Homosexuality used to be, and still is, considered wicked by hundreds of millions of Earthlings.]

Expand full comment

James Muncy ; Yes ; relativity is not just a physics theory. Democracy is an especially challenging system to strive for, since there are so many points of view. It gets to the idea of harm to the common good. Is it safe? Who, if anyone, is potentially or actually hurt? It is messy, for sure.

Expand full comment

We can argue about what should be included in a code of ethics. But once it is decided and enacted it needs to be enforced unless and until it is amended. Don’t like it? Don’t be a judge.

Expand full comment

Good point, and thanks for replying, although I was responding to Debbie's comment; nonetheless, let me respond to both of you, if she wants to join in later: I'm just searching around for absolute truth in these nebulous, endlessly debatable political matters, and almost always failing. (My only certainty is that most things are uncertain, but which ones? Which leads me to admit that I used to be indecisive, but now I'm not so sure.)

A code of ethics can, by majority vote, be deemed valid and thus legitimately enforceable. But what if, looking back, we see how wrong it was, say, in burning witches, owning slaves, or imprisoning homosexuals. Then, of course, it's too late. Yet at that earlier time, that conclusion was ethically and legally valid, by consensus, common sense, tradition, and even holy scripture. Such examples should give us pause when we correct or try to establish such a code. Eternal verities are famous for becoming temporary verities, like Pluto didn't exist, as far as we knew, then it was discovered and labeled a planet only to lose its status as a planet later. If we can't depend on such a seemingly easy-to-reach conclusion, then we should be extra cautious in our attempts to legislate, for example, or certainly in sports gambling.

As you probably know, ancient Greek philosophers spent a lot of time trying to establish definitions, and never had a lot of success. Socrates would embarrass Athenian intelligentsia by asking, What is truth, justice, goodness, beauty, friendship, wisdom, courage, etc., and never got unquestionable, solid answers. (And his reward for doing such was a small tankard of hemlock. Moral of the story: Never embarrass authorities if you want to die a natural death.)

But then, all the above is also questionable, very much so. I'm just trying to find out what I think I know; writing it out, responding to a question or comment gives birth to the disappointing material that comes out of my brain. At least I have a better idea of what's in that mysterious dark cave.

Expand full comment

Well freedom from politics clearly hasn't worked. Not too many people are immune from bribery, money, friendship with benefits.

Expand full comment

I guess the founders thought that anyone who would be appointed to the supreme court would be of the highest character and integrity -- a reasonable expectation -- and would not need impropriety defined for them, let alone enforcement mechanisms and processes outside of Congress itself. Then again, the behavior we see today they could not have imagined.

Expand full comment

The life term for judges was instituted at a time when people didn't live as long as we're living. So, it's archaic and needs to be changed.

Expand full comment

Nine year term is too long, maybe 6. And they need to be appointed by all of Congress and not forced through like Barrett, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch. Then the President can sign off on them.

Expand full comment
Apr 8, 2023·edited Apr 8, 2023

I think one of our responsibilities as citizens of this powerful empire is to ask the tough questions, for example, what accountability? The rest of the world has begged us for two hundred years to stop being so hypocritical, to please stop speaking about freedoms when we suppress it internally and around the world if the price is right. We export what we call "democracy" at gunpoint when decade after decade shows we're just using our military and economic might to boost already absurd profit margins of major corporations. And we have let one transparently corrupt politician and executive after another get away with social and literal murder while gaining the shameful title of world's most incarcerated population by using the laughable claim that we must do so because we are a "nation of laws."

So again, what accountability? When have we ever had true accountability in this country?

Expand full comment

Accountability is a thing of the past, if it ever was a thing at all. We have taken our eyes off the ball, thinking that “democracy” is self-perpetuating and it will keep us safe from fascism. But fascism never goes away. It’s always waiting in the wings for a way to worm itself back into authority. And, here we are …

Expand full comment

Thank you again Ian for being my spokesperson. Absolute boring hypocrisy... we keep shouting what a wonderful place we are.... prove it. Bring in the big word... ACCOUNTABILITY and LAW reform. My disgust is starting to unravel my peace of mind.

Why are we letting such ugly , creepy people run our freedom into the ground! And then we pay them to do so.... talk about loony tunes. Good people always take the blame for this out of control behavior by supporting it. Vote, demand that men who with women cause a pregnancy to support that pregnancy for the life of the human, refuse to allow creeps to plop down “so called laws” with no reasonable authority to rational reason. Quit supporting the economy by buying crap! Think about your own sanity. Don’t let another shameless person speak for you. ICK!

Expand full comment

Much to be said here.

Expand full comment

Well said, Ian!

Expand full comment

“I don’t have any problem with going to Europe, but I prefer the United States, and I prefer seeing the regular parts of the United States. … I prefer the RV parks. I prefer the Walmart parking lots to the beaches and things like that. There’s something normal to me about it.”

- Clarence Thomas

Well. Clarence, I have one word for you:

LIAR!

With all of the information that has surfaced about Thomas and his wife recently there certainly appears to be a conflict of interest for a Supreme Court Justice to faithfully execute his duties. Clarence must be impeached and removed from the Supreme Court Bench.

Expand full comment

I can just PICTURE CT and his wife sitting by their trailer in an RV park! Yeah, right Clarence. Two of the ugliest, most despicable people to ever show their faces in Walmart or anywhere else. Shameless grifters.

Expand full comment

I would feel ashamed to live in the same trailer park as those two.

Expand full comment

😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

Expand full comment

The despicable duo!! Clarence and Gin!

Expand full comment

Gin and toxic! Add a Lyme disease!!

Expand full comment

No normal sentient being prefers a Walmart parking lot to a beach.

Expand full comment

Jaime Ramirez ; Or a beautiful island.

Expand full comment
Comment deleted
Expand full comment

So true! And so far there's not even a hint that either will ever be held accountable for their treachery.

Expand full comment

It’s the only sensible thing to do!

Expand full comment

Doing anything to or about Clarence Thomas himself will be rendered moot upon his death. The better solution is an ethics code for the SCOTUS as a whole and in perpetuity.

Expand full comment
Apr 8, 2023Liked by Robert Reich

Why not both? And throw in term limits as well...and way more checks and balances for all of our government. It's become way too much about big money. Sigh.

Expand full comment

I would love that just as I would love to win a lottery jackpot. Both are equally probable since our lawmakers would need to vote for something destined to do them personal harm. "If wishes were horses, then beggars would ride." -- John Bohner.

Expand full comment

So maybe we need a national citizens initiative to be able to put things on the ballot and get voted in without lawmaker’s personal motivations.

Expand full comment

You absolutely nailed it kim

Expand full comment

The Washingtonian reports today that Harlan Crow (purchaser of favorable SCOTUS rulings by Clarence Thomas) collects Nazi memorabilia. This is all connected.

I have zero faith in Dick Durbin's vague proclamations of accountability.

We need to face a brutal reality. It doesn't matter what legal fate awaits Trump or his hapless minions (if any). Trumpism is American fascism. It has metastasized from the highest court in the land to the state and local level.

DOJ and Congress are inert, at best.

Any real change will come from relentless voting at the local and state elections, for judges and school boards. Everyone who can run for office must run for office. States legislatures have to be flipped...one after the other. Change will have to be bottom up. GenZ must turn its 27% turnout in 2022 to 75%+ from now on.

Accountability won't save our civil rights. The only way to survive the onslaught of power by the GOP is to grab power back...relentlessly.

One TX judge last night released a ruling that set the stage for a national abortion ban by slipping in a footnote that stated that a ZYGOTE should be recognized as a person. The implications are enormous. Women could be prosecuted for a wide array of activities if a miscarriage results.

It's not a question of whether the GOP will take away our rights...they're doing it already.

Expand full comment

Relentless VOTING. And if we’re lucky enough to overcome their fascism, you spelled it out perfectly. Grab power back, relentlessly. Great comment!

Expand full comment

Expand the court and render him irrelevant

Expand full comment

He's already done too much harm to be deemed irrelevant.

Expand full comment

Unfortunately, you are so right !🫤

Expand full comment

The Thomases are seditious traitors. They openly planned and executed the Jan. 6 coup attempt. In a country serious about the rule of law, these two would already be hanged for treason.

Expand full comment

So why has nothing happened?

Expand full comment

Along with Clarence Thomas' lack of competence as a judge, he is also an "Originalist". Originalists seem to think we should revert to the time when the United States Constitution was first put down on paper (parchment?). This was a time when male property owners were the only people with the right to run the country. Women, working people, and slaves were denied the right to control much of anything. Of course, native people were beneath contempt, since they were the people from whom the landowners seized their" land. Anything not included in the Bible was not considered worthy of consideration. Originalists (including Thomas) want for this nation to return to that time (no science, no rights for the poor, no rights for women, no democracy for anyone not owning land).

Expand full comment

Thanks for the analysis that makes it so succinct on what Thomas is at core. Haven’t we know from the beginning Thomas abuses positions of power. I remember his confirmation hearings vividly. Anita Hill was subpoenaed for her testimony. Other women who had similar experiences of sexual harassment from him were not allowed to testify

Thomas started to cry and blubber when he thought his dream job wouldn’t materialize and he emoted his way into a weird logic by those voting on confirmation and won them over. I was revolted by his confirmation and still am.

Expand full comment

And don't have much to offer our beloved nation.

Expand full comment

We need ethics rules across government and the Supreme Court. Our innocence and trust is gone. We now need the rules and holding those that break them accountable, whomever they may be. We need to end the influence of money on policy, leaders, candidates, with sensible campaign finance laws. We are watching our fragile democracy being trampled by greed, power collaborations, and a disdain for the public interest. We have to stop watching and step up actions to foster democracy.

Expand full comment

Ethics rules include the Supreme Court but there is no viable mechanism to enforce them.

IMHO the Supreme Court bar has been complicit for failing to file motions re bias.

IMHO Thomas should be charged with perjury.

Expand full comment

I agree with you, Daniel Solomon. Charge Clarence Thomas with perjury.

Expose his cynical malfeasance. Don't make him a martyr, as I fear impeachment would do.

Expand full comment

How about the 3 that 'rump shoved in there along w/ Alito & John Roberts?

Expand full comment

Yes, you’re right. Charge him with perjury.

Expand full comment

The republicans are striving to destroy the integrity of the Supreme Court, justlike they have destroyed the integrity of the Republican Party. Power is all they care about and they are willing to destroy our democracy to keep it. Can we save our democracy with votes and politics or are we in the same boat as Israel, where it will take an uprising of the populace in order to save it.

Expand full comment

The uprising by youth in Tennessee gives me hope that the latter may work. It doesn't have to be violent, but let it be noisy.

Expand full comment

We shall overcome!

Expand full comment

Nothing at all in that party’s repertoire is real. Everything is blatant lies and conspiracies. I’m tired of the clown show. None of any of this is the least bit funny. Fight back! Voting is a right we have, let’s use it!! 🇺🇸

Expand full comment

Vote if you haven't been gerrymandered out of it! Vote if you aren't intimidated by goons with guns watching you. Vote if your state hasn't taken away your rights.

Expand full comment

And if any of that has happened to you, protest loudly & persistently with others until you get back your rights & can vote peacefully under no coercion.

Expand full comment

Clarence Thomas is a thug that somehow got away with sexual harassment and got onto the Not-So-Supreme Court. Now we find out who he really has been all these years...someone who will use our system of government to better his own life and indulge in the riches of his doners from the fascist far right.... going on trips and living it up while our country is in shambles. Shame on you Grifter Thomas and your indecent fascist wife. You are both shameless low-life grifters just like the former twice-impeached, indicted, Grifter in Chief and most of his family.

Expand full comment

I voted to impeach Thomas, but that is only the first step where the Supreme Court is concerned. Every justice on the bench must now be investigated thoroughly (so as to avoud prejudice), and then the same myst be done for all federal judges. If Thomas is on the take -- and he is -- how many others are too?

Expand full comment

rawgod ; I agree that others have perjured themselves after being installed by tRump and the Republicans. Injustice by the Supreme Court justices is already oxymoronic! Just justices are required for the job! No judge should have a wife 'on the take' to get criminals in line before the corrupted court!

Expand full comment

There is no discussion here. These are clearly severe infractions of judicial ethics. He must step down or be impeached. Roberts' court has become a joke.

Expand full comment