Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more. You can visit the forum page to see the list of forum nodes (categories/rooms) for topics.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans includes such people as Dave Thomas, Denzel Washington, Lawrence Welk, Oprah Winfrey, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Bob Hope and Carrol Burnett. What's wrong with Clarence Thomas being on that list too?Months after securing his seat on the Supreme Court in highly contentious confirmation hearings, Thomas joined the Horatio Alger Association of Distinguished Americans, named after the Gilded Age author.
Can anyone show evidence of it affecting the outcome of a case before the Court?It's ALL persuasions. To say otherwise in naive. Or disengenuous.
Perhaps so, but she was on there in '93 and Epstein's island wasn't even close to being on people's radars. It's a lifetime award.I do not think (knowing what I -- and you) know now about Lolita Island, that I would feel honored by someone who put Oprah Winfrey down as "Distiguished". More like "Depraved".
Joe -- Love ya, but that is as far as I read on the post above. Your heart is good, but are simply leading with your chin with your eyes closed.Can anyone show evidence of it affecting the outcome of a case before the Court?
The ONLY reason the court is currently under attack is due to its mostly conservative makeup.Joe -- Love ya, but that is as far as I read on the post above. Your heart is good, but are simply leading with your chin with your eyes closed.
To answer your question: You will be able to show evidence affecting the outcome of a Court case by the time you get to the end of this post.
The crooks in black robes I named above. The hoopla is BECAUSE they got caught being "bought" on issues.
Look... if you don't believe me (or don't want to) I will pick just one. After that, you are on the hook to type in the name of the SC person, and add some word meaning wrong-doing/being bought/bribed/coerced/owned.
You will most ricky-tick have an epiphany. These people are human to the soul -- with a human's weaknesses in different areas: money, power, sex, fear, greed.
OK -- This one answers you directly:
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Justice Abe Fortas suffered a fatal flaw for judges. He liked to take bribes. Appointed to the Supreme Court by President Lyndon Johnson in 1965, Fortas had already faced serious allegations of improperly promoting LBJ’s political career while serving on the highest court in the land. Things got a lot worse for Justice Fortas in 1969, when it was revealed that he had accepted a secret legal retainer from his former friend and client, infamous Wall Street financier Louis Wolfson. Under their agreement, Wolfson was to pay Fortas $20,000 a year for life in return for special help and “consultation” during his pending trial on charges of securities fraud.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The eponymous "Wolf Of Wall Street" had a Supreme Court Justice in his pocket for $20K/year for life.
So yeah, they ARE human. And if you open your eyes and check the date that Roberts went on the Lolita Express, you will see the operation was in full swing at that time. Even royalty was getting young stuff. They did not go there for surfing or having a grand outdoor cookout. It was all underground**
**And it was all fimed. Did somebody mention Roberts?
"Alito, famously a constitutional originalist, claims that the SCOTUS was not created by Congress but by the Constitution, in which he finds no provision allowing for the imposition of ethics on the Court by Congress."^^^^
U.S. Congressman Slams Alito's "Wrong, Arrogant" Claims, Gives Evidence
Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito took to the pages of the Wall Street Journal for the second time in recent months, this time not to defend his own ethics but to argue that Congress has little jurisdiction over the Supreme Court and therefore no business trying to impose ethical standards on its Justices.
[NOTE: Alito is responding to the uproar over the Justice Clarence Thomas revelations and subsequent legislation that advanced in the Senate to impose on the Supreme Court similar ethical standards that all lower courts must already adhere to by law.]
Alito, famously a constitutional originalist, claims that the SCOTUS was not created by Congress but by the Constitution, in which he finds no provision allowing for the imposition of ethics on the Court by Congress.
More:
the leftist/dems
They're (leftists/dems) are the ones suddenly po'd at the SC because they no longer have a majority on the court. They are the ones trying to "get 'em". They're the ones attempting to change the court.evil swine - stone them
blasphemers - crucify them
heretics - boil them in oil
Get em good!
Spot on correct. This glaring problem has definitely become public because the left/dems control of the SC judges has become less firm. Cannot have that.They're (leftists/dems) are the ones suddenly po'd at the SC because they no longer have a majority on the court. They are the ones trying to "get 'em". They're the ones attempting to change the court.
....and all because we've recently started getting rulings that are based on the Constitution. Leftist/dems prefer rulings that go against the Constitution.
A perfect example of greed/weakness being a human trait, and SCOTUS members are human. So they resist any change to the "working system".US thinktank linked to billionaires behind supreme court wealth tax case lobbying
An influential thinktank closely linked to two billionaires who provided lavish travel gifts to conservative supreme court justices is behind a successful lobbying campaign to get the US high court to take on a case that could protect them and other billionaires from a possible future wealth tax.
The Manhattan Institute was one of eight conservative advocacy groups that filed amicus briefs urging the supreme court to take on Moore v US, a $15,000 tax case that Democrats have warned could permanently “lock in” the right of billionaires to opt out of paying fair taxes.
Billionaire hedge fund manager Paul Singer is chairman of the Manhattan Institute and Kathy Crow, who is married to real estate mogul Harlan Crow, serves as a trustee of the group. Both have provided two of the justices – Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas, respectively – with private travel gifts and have socialised with the judges on lavish vacations, according to reports in ProPublica and other media outlets.
Billionaire-linked US thinktank behind supreme court wealth tax case lobbying
Manhattan Institute one of eight conservative advocacy groups that filed amicus briefs urging the court to hear Moore v USwww.theguardian.com
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?