You're such a good Christian. I can only assume you agree with my premise, since you had no answer other than a personal attack (your trademark).

TexasScientist said:

---

You're such a good Christian. I can only assume you agree with my premise, since you had no answer other than a personal attack (your trademark).

---

That is how TS admits he has no real response.

https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2023/04/Letter-to-Chairman-Durbin-04.25.2023.pdf

A letter from all 9 scotus judges

4th and Inches said:

---

https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2023/04/Letter-to-Chairman-Durbin-04.25.2023.pdf

A letter from all 9 scotus judges

---

Is that the polite way of telling Congress to perform an anatomically impossible act?

4th and Inches said:

---

https://static.foxnews.com/foxnews.com/content/uploads/2023/04/Letter-to-Chairman-Durbin-04.25.2023.pdf

A letter from all 9 scotus judges

---

One thing SCOTUS will have in common with the Congress and the White House:

They will not allow their powers or privileges to be trimmed by one of the other branches.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

OB83 is all about politics over integrity. He holds the left and middle to a standard he won't hold the right or himself to. He prefers autocracy to democracy.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

OB83 is all about politics over integrity. He holds the left and middle to a standard he won't hold the right or himself to. He prefers autocracy to democracy.

---

Still no substance from TS. He attacks me but pretends I'm the bad guy for pointing out his hypocrisy.

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

Crickets on the scotus letter..

The start of the last paragraph is important:

"A word is necessary concerning security"

The SCOTUS is making clear to Congress they have not forgotten the threat to their safety, and the fact that Congress did nothing to improve their safety.

A Congress which treats SCOTUS Justices as expendable will get no cooperation from them on political fishing trips.

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

Nothing shows the political divide in this country today more then the SCOTUS. When you can automatically tell how the vote is going you know their politics override their Judicial integrity.

When I was naive I use to think these guys are impartial amoung many other naive beliefs at one point or another.

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

---

Yes, to me it is self serving and attempts to misdirect one away from the issue of the ethical conduct and ethical standards of the highest court in the land.

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

---

Yes, to me it is self serving and attempts to misdirect one away from the issue of the ethical conduct and ethical standards of the highest court in the land.

---

Gotcha, the entire court is covering for C Thomas..

Porteroso said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

I don't typically agree with Eugene Robinson's views, but he has some points worthy of consideration. I think Thomas has crossed a protective boundary of the court, and blurred the lines of judicial impartiality avoiding even the appearance of conflict. The question is will he follow precedent, or damage the integrity of the court?

"A little context: In 1969, Supreme Court Justice Abe Fortas resigned after it was learned that he had accepted, then returned, $20,000 from a Wall Street financier. At the time, Chief Justice Earl Warren felt it was important that Fortas step down to preserve the court's reputation."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2023/04/17/clarence-thomas-disclosures-harlan-crow-respect/

…..Thanks to reporting this month by ProPublica, we now know that Thomas and his wife, Virginia "Ginni" Thomas, a hard-right Republican activist, have been treated to lavish vacations worth hundreds of thousands of dollars by Harlan Crow, a politically active Texas billionaire. These jaunts included a vacation in Indonesia in 2019 that involved flights on Crow's private jet and an island-hopping tour on a superyacht a nine-day trip that alone would have cost the couple more than $500,000. If they had paid for it themselves. Which they did not.

There were also other trips on Crow's jet and frequent stays at properties he owns in the Adirondacks and in East Texas, according to ProPublica. Accompanying the Thomases as guests, at times, were conservative business executives and thought leaders.

And for some reason, Thomas failed to report any of these gifts any of them on the disclosure forms he is required to submit annually.

Nor did Thomas disclose the fact that Crow purchased the Georgia house the justice's mother lives in, then made tens of thousands of dollars' worth of improvements to the dwelling, ProPublica subsequently revealed.

We should have seen this coming. From 2003 to 2007, on his disclosure forms, Thomas checked the box labeled "none" for his wife's income. During that period, Ginni Thomas earned more than $686,000 from the conservative Heritage Foundation. When called on the lie, Thomas said it was an error "due to a misunderstanding of the filing instructions."


Likewise, regarding the trips he took at Crow's expense, Thomas issued a statement claiming that early in his time on the Supreme Court, he "was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable."

Stop laughing. All right, yes, it is hilarious. Thomas expects the nation to take seriously his views on the subtlest contours of the Constitution. He also expects us to believe he cannot understand a clear and simple instruction on a disclosure form; that he sees no distinction between "personal hospitality" and trips halfway around the world by private jet; and that he sees nothing wrong about having a member of the board of the conservative American Enterprise Institute purchase and fix up his mother's house. …

---

has crow or a business crow owns ever had a case near the court?

Nothing liberals hate more than a conservative black man..

---

The droning on about him being black is getting so constant i wonder if that really is his sole defense. Funny that Repubs are the ones saying "can't hold this guy accountable, he's black!!" You partisan hacks are all the same.

---

Actually, I think the Republicans are playing by the rules set by Democrats.

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

---

Yes, to me it is self serving and attempts to misdirect one away from the issue of the ethical conduct and ethical standards of the highest court in the land.

---

Which, honestly, is not a constitutional concern of the Senate. The Senate has many checks on the Courts but it has no authority to inquire or otherwise question the ethical standards of the US Supreme Court. The House holds the sole authority for impeachment.

GrowlTowel said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

---

Yes, to me it is self serving and attempts to misdirect one away from the issue of the ethical conduct and ethical standards of the highest court in the land.

---

Which, honestly, is not a constitutional concern of the Senate. The Senate has many checks on the Courts but it has no authority to inquire or otherwise question the ethical standards of the US Supreme Court. The House holds the sole authority for impeachment.

---

And the Justice Department can enforce existing law. Maybe we need more specific judicial conduct laws.

TexasScientist said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

---

Yes, to me it is self serving and attempts to misdirect one away from the issue of the ethical conduct and ethical standards of the highest court in the land.

---

Which, honestly, is not a constitutional concern of the Senate. The Senate has many checks on the Courts but it has no authority to inquire or otherwise question the ethical standards of the US Supreme Court. The House holds the sole authority for impeachment.

---

And the Justice Department can enforce existing law. Maybe we need more specific judicial conduct laws.

---

Justice Thomas believed, probably correctly, that disclosure was not required. The Judicial Conference updated its guidelines and added stricter requirements a few weeks ago. That would seem to be the end of it.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

---

Delusion is required to believe your claims.

Sam Lowry said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

GrowlTowel said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

4th and Inches said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

riflebear said:

---

🔥🔥 Senator Ted Cruz CALLS OUT the "Kangaroo Circus" that Senate Democrats are holding in order to launch "a political attack at a Justice they hate," Clarence Thomas, all while ignoring the many trips taken by liberal Supreme Court Justices, along with safety of the justices. pic.twitter.com/HuTPXraNGO

— The Article III Project (A3P) (@Article3Project) May 2, 2023

---

I want to hear more about trips with which other justices have been lavished. Clearly, judicial ethical standards that apply to lower courts should be enforced agains the SCOTUS

---

no opinion on 9-0 scotus letter?

---

Yes, to me it is self serving and attempts to misdirect one away from the issue of the ethical conduct and ethical standards of the highest court in the land.

---

Which, honestly, is not a constitutional concern of the Senate. The Senate has many checks on the Courts but it has no authority to inquire or otherwise question the ethical standards of the US Supreme Court. The House holds the sole authority for impeachment.

---

And the Justice Department can enforce existing law. Maybe we need more specific judicial conduct laws.

---

Justice Thomas believed, probably correctly, that disclosure was not required. The Judicial Conference updated its guidelines and added stricter requirements a few weeks ago. That would seem to be the end of it.

---

Yep the LA Times wrote an article today discussing how we have an unchecked high court even after the problem has been solved.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

---

Delusion is required to believe your claims.

---

^^^ Misdirection and projection.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

---

Delusion is required to believe your claims.

---

^^^ Misdirection and projection.

---

Not in the least, at least on my part.

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

---

Delusion is required to believe your claims.

---

^^^ Misdirection and projection.

---

Not in the least, at least on my part.

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

---

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

---

Delusion is required to believe your claims.

---

^^^ Misdirection and projection.

---

Not in the least, at least on my part.

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

---

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

---

Nice try TS, but all you did there was prove you are willing to swipe other people's words and pretend they are your own.

You owned yourself, thereby.

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

TexasScientist said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Get back to me when you want the same critical look at any of the Left-leaning Justices.

For now, go play in traffic.

---

I want the same critical look at all of the justices. They're supposed to conduct themselves in a non partisan manner, without even the appearance of a conflict, or partisanship, when they accept a position on the bench.

---

Not true. You have not raised one word against any of Obama's awful picks.

Not one of them would stand up to serious scrutiny, but you gotta target the black conservative Justice.'

Don't know if that speaks more about your racism or proves the lie about your claim to your political balance, but it sure fails the smell test.

---

You're full of it. I didn't support any of Obama's picks. However, tell me which ones have accepted lavish gifts, and I'll denounce them also. I will say this though. If any of Obama's picks had accepted lavish trips from say... George Soros, you would be the first to allege fowl.

---

Vice versa. You can't show me even one post where you went after Obama's picks.

Go play in traffic you Leftist, no one is fooled.

---

Lmao death to the leftists. You zealots crack me up.

---

Still waiting to see you or TS go after even one of the left-leaning Justices.

You are total hypocrites, and fooling no one.

---

I honestly don't follow the Supreme Court like some of you. When I see idiotic decisions I rarely read through the opinions. Its just not my field. Only read sometimes because I want to be at least a tiny bit informed. I still remember that you want leftists to die BTW. No matter which justices i may write about on an internet forum, you are still a zealot.

---

You are an hypocrite and a liar. Not a peep against Sotomeyer or Kagan or Jackson, but you love you a good smear against Thomas or Kavanaugh.

And no, I don't 'want leftists to die' anymore than you want to vote for Trump. But when you post stupid claims, I will speak to the sort of behavior that reflects.

If you want to be taken seriously, Porteroso, either make a serious effort an objectivity or just admit you are a shameless partisan. Pretending you are balanced is a lazy and laughable look for you.

---

^^^^^ = OB projecting. I'm sure he thinks Tucker Carlson got a raw deal at Fox.

---

TS directly claims to know what I am thinking (and as usual he is wrong), but imagines I am the one projecting here.

---

Imagination isn't required to see the obvious.

---

Delusion is required to believe your claims.

---

^^^ Misdirection and projection.

---

Not in the least, at least on my part.

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

---

You see things which aren't there, accuse me of things I didn't say, and have an abundance of standards to suit your mood so that whatever you do, it somehow is never wrong no matter how many cliffs off which you dive.

---

Nice try TS, but all you did there was prove you are willing to swipe other people's words and pretend they are your own.

You owned yourself, thereby.

---

No, consider the reply as a mirror for your inward reflection.

Poor TS, still can do no better than use someone else's words and pretend he made a point.