GT40s.com
MK-I  MK-II  MK-III  MK-IV  GULF  MIRAGE  J-CAR  LOLA
GT40s.com
Home Forum Gallery Support GT40s.com  
Register FAQ Advertisers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   GT40s.com > >

Notices

The Paddock Enter at your own risk.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 1st February 2011, 07:23 PM   #61
YerDugliness's Avatar
YerDugliness
Lifetime Premier Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SW Kansas
GT40: 1/24 scale MKII
Posts: 2,276
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by trader View Post
Jim since the justice himself did NOT take any money than your whole argument is mute. Had HE been the one in question than I could understand your outrage but since that is NOT the case me thinks that thou protest too much! Sorry Al didn't mean to step on your toes.
Damian, Jim is absolutely correct in this issue. The government must (and should) be concerned about familial influences, ergo there is the question on the disclosure form relating to the "spouse". The government did not ask Mrs. Thomas if she was paid by a conservative think tank, they simply required Mr. Thomas to indicate whether or not his spouse received income that was not interest based.

Mr. Thomas, whether or not he actually filled out the form, signed the form as required, thereby swearing under penalty of perjury that his spouse DID NOT receive any non-interest income. Mr. Thomas is responsible for the accuracy of the information on the form and he failed, for whatever reason, to report accurately the status of his wife's income.

It falls far from the "...much ado about nothing" category, IMHO. NOBODY in the U.S.A. is above the law, not even Richard Nixon (he responded to a question regarding Watergate during an interview to the effect that he believed "If the president does it, it's NOT against the law".....what a shame he wasn't prosecuted for his misunderstanding of the facts).

Mr. Thomas could, and should, be held accountable for his error. Perhaps it was a simple error, but I, for one, find it difficult to believe that any married couple would be unaware of family income originating from their spouses if it were of the magnitude reported by Jim. I mean, they both also have to sign off on their income taxes IF they filed a joint return. Now, if Mr. and Mrs. Thomas file separate returns, he may well have been unaware of her income (although, again, it'd be hard to not be aware of income in that amount, IMHO), but he was still responsible for the accuracy of the information on the disclosure form, regardless of his political party affiliation or his political beliefs. This is not an issue of Demopublicans against Republicrats, liberals against conservatives, skinheads against hippies, it is an issue of honesty from one of the 9 people who are almost unfettered in their ability to MAKE law (don't believe me, think about Roe V. Wade....there's an example where the Supreme Court established legality).

I can't believe you aren't incensed by this transgression against the population of our great country. SHAME ON all who are not, this man should have his feet held to the fire for this 6 year act of deception and we as citizens should be marching on the streets in protest.

Cheers to all those who value the principals on which our constitution was based, which includes honesty and impartiality in the judiciary branch of the government, and JEERS to those who don't recognize the magnitude of this transgression.

Doug
__________________
YD,E./PNB
Alís RIGHT...Buy American!!!
Retired twice, now back at work, but still attempting to age disgracefully
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 0 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
YerDugliness is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 08:09 PM   #62
Mark Worthington's Avatar
Mark Worthington
10 tenths
United States
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Massachusetts
GT40: RF No. 36
Posts: 1,930
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Jim, I've been meaning to say this for a long time: you are a blithering idiot. I'll be happy to go toe-to-toe with you sometime, but not in this thread, despite the tired leftist talking points that you spew. There is no excuse for Clarence Thomas, or any government employee, to have mis-represented his income.
__________________
Regards,
Mark

RF Chassis No. 36 still under construction
347, MoTeC EFI, pin drives, leather, etc.
Mark Worthington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 08:35 PM   #63
Pat
Veek's Avatar
Veek
Silver Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Windermere, FL
GT40: CAV
Posts: 1,612
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

The rage here is incredible and perhaps the assumptive leaps are occurring because Justice Thomas is (pick one or more):
-A conservative,
-A black conservative,
-A constitutionalist.
-Married to a Caucasian,
-Married to a conservative,
-Married to a Tea Party activist,
-Stands in the way of a liberal majority in the supreme court,
-Failed to properly disclose his wife's employers.
-None of the above and provide your own answer…
What is known:
-ABC reports Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas amended 20 years worth of financial disclosure forms last week after a liberal watchdog group questioned the omission of his wife's place of employment.
-The watchdog group was conducting it's own investigation of Ms Thomas' activities with the Tea Party.
-The employment of Ms Thomas is (and has been) a matter of public record.
-Ms Thomas has been an active public figure and her employers known in the media.
-Ms Thomas has made no apparent effort to conceal her employment. In fact, she has been publicly criticized for being so outspoken. (For example, Ms Thomas had come under fire last year for an article posted on Liberty Central's website originally attributed to her that suggested the recently passed health care legislation was unconstitutional. Critics suggested that her comments compromised Justice Thomas' impartiality on an issue that will likely come before the Court in the future.) (My bet as to the real motivation in play.)

-Liberal blogs report the disclosure form completion as criminal and seek impeachment and prosecution.

-According to ABC News, The Ethics in Government Act of 1978 requires all federal judges to disclose their spouse's employer. They are not required to list the total income.
Let me say that again: THEY ARE NOT REQUIRED TO LIST TOTAL INCOME! This is about failure to cite Ms Thomas' employers, apparently nothing more.

-None of Thomas' forms, covering activities through Dec. 31, 2009, mention his wife's work at Liberty Central, a conservative political education group she co-founded in January 2009 in part to energize Tea Party activists. (But the group did not officially launch until May 2010, which will only be covered during in the next disclosure period)
-There’s no formal mechanism for review of conflicts among Supreme Court justices.

There is no evidence that Ms Thomas was paid for work not done, evaded taxes, or that Justice Thomas or his wife received any sort of "bribe".

If this is all there is, this rhetoric is simply scandal mongering.
And no Jim, I don't think Sarah Palin is "murderous".
__________________
Regards,
VEEK

CAV #04
Florida
Veek is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 08:40 PM   #64
Igofaster's Avatar
Igofaster
8 Tenths
United States
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Granite Bay, CA
GT40: SPF GT P2265
Posts: 822
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Veek, +1.
__________________
Ron Rowberry
"Better to have lived one day as a lion than a lifetime as a lamb"
Igofaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 08:42 PM   #65
Igofaster's Avatar
Igofaster
8 Tenths
United States
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Granite Bay, CA
GT40: SPF GT P2265
Posts: 822
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Mark, you too. +1
__________________
Ron Rowberry
"Better to have lived one day as a lion than a lifetime as a lamb"
Igofaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 08:49 PM   #66
Jim Craik's Avatar
Jim Craik
Lifetime Premier Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Gatos, CA
GT40: P2264, LMP-002
Posts: 5,224
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Gee Mark,

You say I am a "blithering idiot" then you say you agree with the overall premiss of this tread, does that not make you and RonR blithering idiots as well?
__________________
Ah, but I was so much older then....

Last edited by Jim Craik; 1st February 2011 at 10:31 PM.
Jim Craik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 08:57 PM   #67
Cliffbeer2
Silver Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sand Point, WA
Posts: 2,638
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by slowhand View Post
If anyone thinks that Jim is fair and balanced they have been spiking their tea.
Did it ever occur that there is a CPA involved? What does he have to say about the boxes checked? Was it his advise? There are a lot of questions here that are unanswered.
That being said, if anyone, and I mean anyone tries to get away with illegal activity while in the employ of America, they should be drawn and quartered. Let's see the proof of intent though, and not a political witchunt of which the government is very good at. I fear that unbiased investigations are not possible with the current climate in Washington. Does anyone think this looks like the personal attack politics that is prevelent in largely Democrat majority controlled states like Illinois? If it smells like sh*t, it probably is.

Garry
Garry, you're right, best to have all the facts present (or as many as possible) before leaping to any conclusions.

However, there's a very significant point in what you raised....and that is that the disclosure forms are personal to the Justice. Meaning, a Justice cannot avoid the personal obligation for the truthfullness of the disclosure by trying to involve some other party in their preparation or by saying they relied on some other party in the detail. In other words, the Justice has a personal obligation of the highest order to make accurate disclosures from personal knowledge, not to the best of his knowledge, or as may be indicated by some other party. That's the law, not just my opinion. The Justices know the importance/significance of these disclosures...it is engrained into them to a very deep level. I know this as my closest friend from law school was a clerk to one of them....Justice Thomas in fact....some years ago...and the disclosure requirements are front and center in the administration of the Court.
Cliffbeer2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 09:02 PM   #68
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Craik View Post
Al,

Do you read the posts?

For the third time, this is not about taxes!

This is about the "Anual Supreme Court Financial Disclosure Form" that each Justice is required to full out each year.

This form is so "WE THE PEOPLE" can see what they are being paid for and if our Justices are being unduly inflenced.

Under spousal non-interest income he checked ****NONE**** each year, year after year even while she was being paid $100,000+ per year.

This money came from a concervative political action group, they raise mony each year to influence people with power to vote in ways they want!!!!!!

Al, I'll ask one more time, if this was a Liberal Justice accepting and lieing about money from Acorn or the ACLU would you be defending him???

Al, Yes or NO, it really is that easy.

Supreme Court Justice Paid Off, No payoff still, proof!

Last edited by Al Wohlstrom; 1st February 2011 at 09:08 PM.
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 09:03 PM   #69
Cliffbeer2
Silver Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sand Point, WA
Posts: 2,638
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by YerDugliness View Post
Damian, Jim is absolutely correct in this issue. The government must (and should) be concerned about familial influences, ergo there is the question on the disclosure form relating to the "spouse". The government did not ask Mrs. Thomas if she was paid by a conservative think tank, they simply required Mr. Thomas to indicate whether or not his spouse received income that was not interest based.

Mr. Thomas, whether or not he actually filled out the form, signed the form as required, thereby swearing under penalty of perjury that his spouse DID NOT receive any non-interest income. Mr. Thomas is responsible for the accuracy of the information on the form and he failed, for whatever reason, to report accurately the status of his wife's income.

It falls far from the "...much ado about nothing" category, IMHO. NOBODY in the U.S.A. is above the law, not even Richard Nixon (he responded to a question regarding Watergate during an interview to the effect that he believed "If the president does it, it's NOT against the law".....what a shame he wasn't prosecuted for his misunderstanding of the facts).

Mr. Thomas could, and should, be held accountable for his error. Perhaps it was a simple error, but I, for one, find it difficult to believe that any married couple would be unaware of family income originating from their spouses if it were of the magnitude reported by Jim. I mean, they both also have to sign off on their income taxes IF they filed a joint return. Now, if Mr. and Mrs. Thomas file separate returns, he may well have been unaware of her income (although, again, it'd be hard to not be aware of income in that amount, IMHO), but he was still responsible for the accuracy of the information on the disclosure form, regardless of his political party affiliation or his political beliefs. This is not an issue of Demopublicans against Republicrats, liberals against conservatives, skinheads against hippies, it is an issue of honesty from one of the 9 people who are almost unfettered in their ability to MAKE law (don't believe me, think about Roe V. Wade....there's an example where the Supreme Court established legality).

I can't believe you aren't incensed by this transgression against the population of our great country. SHAME ON all who are not, this man should have his feet held to the fire for this 6 year act of deception and we as citizens should be marching on the streets in protest.

Cheers to all those who value the principals on which our constitution was based, which includes honesty and impartiality in the judiciary branch of the government, and JEERS to those who don't recognize the magnitude of this transgression.

Doug
+1 Doug.

Here's one thing we should all think about once in a while: abiding by the LAW is one of the few things that separates the US and most Westernized countries from the rest of the world. It is, in my opinion, THE thing that allows us to lead a civilized existence....in contrast to much of, if not most, of the rest of the world. I've done business in all kinds of places around the world and the only place I'd ever keep any meaningful amount of assets is in a civilized country like the US/Can or EU countries where the LAW actually means something!
Cliffbeer2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 09:04 PM   #70
Igofaster's Avatar
Igofaster
8 Tenths
United States
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Granite Bay, CA
GT40: SPF GT P2265
Posts: 822
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

I say we wait until all the facts come out, then hang him....but only after stringing up an the entire 9th circuit.
__________________
Ron Rowberry
"Better to have lived one day as a lion than a lifetime as a lamb"
Igofaster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 09:09 PM   #71
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

This stuff is straight out of "Rules For Radicals"
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 09:48 PM   #72
Jim Craik's Avatar
Jim Craik
Lifetime Premier Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Gatos, CA
GT40: P2264, LMP-002
Posts: 5,224
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Doug, Cliff

I can see that you both know how incredibly important this is. In my view the Supreme Court is by far the most important part of our Government, the very bedrock of our Nations success!

When I was in school the Supreme Court was tops (I minored in political science). The image of a body of nine Justices, well paid for LIFE, so they would have no need or worry about money, no one could influene these "just and Honerable" folks bounded only by the Constitution. Great judges who would not stand for even the slightest hint of impropriety. What has become if these ideals?

What would Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Earl Warren say about this?

How could folk grow up in this Country and not know how important this is? Did Al, Damian, Veek and the others miss that part of Government, were they absent that day or did the school system fail them?

So very sad.
__________________
Ah, but I was so much older then....

Last edited by Jim Craik; 1st February 2011 at 10:27 PM.
Jim Craik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 10:30 PM   #73
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Craik View Post
Doug, Cliff

I can see that you both know how incredibly important this is. In my view the Supreme Court is by far the most important part of our Government, the very bedrock of our Nations success!

When I was in school the Supreme Court was tops (I minored in political science). The image of a body of nine Justices, well paid for LIFE, so they would have no need or worry about money, no one could influene these "just and Honerable" folks bounded only by the Constitution. Great judges who would not stand for even the slightest hint of impropriety. What has become if these ideals?

What would Thomas Jefferson, James Madison and Earl Warren say about this?

How could folk grow up in this Country and not know how important this is? Did Al, Damian, Veek and the others miss that part of Government, were they absent that day or did the school system fail.

So very sad.
You keep talking with righteous indignation, where is your proof? You don't have any.
Supreme Court Justice Paid Off. You said it, now prove it!
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 10:41 PM   #74
Jim Craik's Avatar
Jim Craik
Lifetime Premier Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Gatos, CA
GT40: P2264, LMP-002
Posts: 5,224
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

He lied on his Supreme Court papers year after year!

Proof, when caught he went back and changed the lies.
__________________
Ah, but I was so much older then....
Jim Craik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 10:46 PM   #75
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Craik View Post
He lied on his Supreme Court papers year after year!

Proof, when caught he went back and changed the lies.
You wrote the title of this thread, prove it!!!


"Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage." Saul Alinsky
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 11:12 PM   #76
Jim Craik's Avatar
Jim Craik
Lifetime Premier Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Gatos, CA
GT40: P2264, LMP-002
Posts: 5,224
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

His family received almost 3/4 of a million $ from a political action commity who spend money to influence people in power. He accepted this money and tried to cover it up. He wanted the money but he did not want the people to know, where I come from this man was bought off! So much for honorable men above reproach, So much for impartiality.

You are quoting Saul Alinsky, since when are you reading communists propaganda.

"Truth is the most potent weapon". James Craik
__________________
Ah, but I was so much older then....

Last edited by Jim Craik; 2nd February 2011 at 12:02 AM.
Jim Craik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 1st February 2011, 11:33 PM   #77
Jim Craik's Avatar
Jim Craik
Lifetime Premier Supporter
United States
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Los Gatos, CA
GT40: P2264, LMP-002
Posts: 5,224
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Ok Al,

Now it's your turn, you said that MOST of President Obamas appointees had tax problems, when asked to prove it you named 7. There are approximately 134 appointees, please give us 59 more. Prove It Al!
__________________
Ah, but I was so much older then....

Last edited by Jim Craik; 1st February 2011 at 11:41 PM.
Jim Craik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2011, 12:07 AM   #78
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Craik View Post
Ok Al,

Now it's your turn, you said that MOST of President Obamas appointees had tax problems, when asked to prove it you named 7. There are approximately 134 appointees, please give us 59 more. Prove It Al!
No, You wrote the bogus title, prove it!!!!!
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2011, 12:10 AM   #79
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Salinsky probably had something about changing the subject, you've read him haven't you? One of BO's mentors.
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd February 2011, 12:14 AM   #80
Al Wohlstrom's Avatar
Al Wohlstrom
I Have No Life
United States
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Tucson, AZ
GT40: RCR SLC LS7 Ric
Posts: 2,239
Re: Supreme Court Justice Paid Off

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim Craik View Post
His family received almost 3/4 of a million $ from a political action commity who spend money to influence people in power. He accepted this money and tried to cover it up. He wanted the money but he did not want the people to know, where I come from this man was bought off! So much for honorable men above reproach, So much for impartiality.

You are quoting Saul Alinsky, since when are you reading communists propaganda.

"Truth is the most potent weapon". James Craik
Where did you come up with this bullshit?
Al Wohlstrom is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Tom Kristensen - Sportsman Supreme David Morton The Paddock 5 8th January 2010 08:42 PM
Charity Appeal for Headley Court. David Morton The Paddock 0 25th August 2009 12:20 PM
COURT OF ENQUIRY - Please read carefully Fred W B The Paddock 9 23rd June 2007 01:11 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:04 AM.