Clarence Thomas Had a Child in Private School. Harlan Crow Paid the Tuition.

25,376 Views | 248 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by TexasScientist
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.

Fre3dombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.




It takes a village no?
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Fre3dombear said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.




It takes a village no?

Exactly. Dems are playing a kafkhatrap; if Thomas helps the kid, there is impropriety; doesn't help the kid, there is a character problem.

Maybe they're just beating up on black conservatives to discourage blacks from becoming conservatives. It's the only thing that really makes sense.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mothra said:

Just curious as to what you'd like to see happen. Do you think he should immediately resign and allow Joe Biden to appoint a liberal Supreme Court justice?


Two alternatives. One, adopt financial disclosure procedures.

Two, take the NASCAR approach and put patches on their robes so we know who their sponsors are.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to other justices regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, Trump they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.
Edits for illustration purposes, only.

Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, Trump they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.
Edits for illustration purposes, only.


I've often argued that Trump was a victim of petty persecutions, especially early in his presidency. Post-2020 election is of course a different matter.
Fre3dombear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

Fre3dombear said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.




It takes a village no?

Exactly. Dems are playing a kafkhatrap; if Thomas helps the kid, there is impropriety; doesn't help the kid, there is a character problem.

Maybe they're just beating up on black conservatives to discourage blacks from becoming conservatives. It's the only thing that really makes sense.


Happens in my community all the time if you try to excel too much. Those that can develop a thick skin and ignore it live a good life in my experience but lost are weak…and sad
OsoCoreyell
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Getting to the actual point, what evidence is there that this influenced his decision-making in his jurisprudence? Is there any? Did Crowe have business before the court?

There isn't an ethical code or law against having friends, even friends that help you and your family out.
Mothra
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

Mothra said:

Just curious as to what you'd like to see happen. Do you think he should immediately resign and allow Joe Biden to appoint a liberal Supreme Court justice?


Two alternatives. One, adopt financial disclosure procedures.

Two, take the NASCAR approach and put patches on their robes so we know who their sponsors are.

But we kind of already do.
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Amazing the regressive outrage at a young man in a terrible situation getting a second chance - that's horrible ... but the Biden Crime Family making millions from Putin and China is nothing.9
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Then, you must think that should apply all the way down the federal judiciary.
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Then, you must think that should apply all the way down the federal judiciary.
SCOTUS is different because it was created expressly by the Constitution. Lower courts had to be created by Congress.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Then, you must think that should apply all the way down the federal judiciary.
SCOTUS is different because it was created expressly by the Constitution. Lower courts had to be created by Congress.
So you don't believe Congress can pass laws regulating justices' ethical conduct?
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
No not really, and they're both grifters. Your argument is about relationships, and would excuse Hunter also.
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Then, you must think that should apply all the way down the federal judiciary.
SCOTUS is different because it was created expressly by the Constitution. Lower courts had to be created by Congress.
So you don't believe Congress can pass laws regulating justices' ethical conduct?
they already have one.. impeachment.
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
Sam Lowry
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Then, you must think that should apply all the way down the federal judiciary.
SCOTUS is different because it was created expressly by the Constitution. Lower courts had to be created by Congress.
So you don't believe Congress can pass laws regulating justices' ethical conduct?
It's debatable, but in my opinion, no. More important, they shouldn't. I've heard two main arguments for it, neither of which is persuasive.

The first argument is that regulation by Congress would improve trust and safeguard the Court's reputation with the public. I believe it would have the opposite effect. The current controversy well demonstrates this. The allegations against Thomas are petty, at most. There's no evidence of anything like actual bribery or influence. Imagine what partisan critics of the Court could do with the laws you're proposing. There would be an endless series of ideological attacks in the guise of ethical issues, most of them highly technical and all of them subject to emotionally and politically charged debate in Congress and the media. It would be like another Kavanaugh hearing every year. The public's cynicism would only increase as a result.

The second argument is that, while it is essential for the justices to maintain decisional independence, they are already subject to the power of the purse and the regulation of their day-to-day operations. But in fact the proposed ethical laws would threaten their decisional independence in the worst way. They would be constantly aware of the threat of congressional hearings, with all the inflammatory rhetoric, political spin, and public spectacle I described above.

And let's be honest -- that's the whole point of all this. It's what the proponents of the legislation want. They already have the power to impeach, but impeaching on such flimsy charges would look exactly like the raw power grab that it is. An official code of ethics would provide a kind of shortcut. Violation of the code would itself become an issue, if not sufficient to warrant impeachment then at least sufficient to fuel hysterical media coverage and public outrage until the justice is forced to resign. None of this helps the country or serves any purpose except to thwart jurisprudence that the Democrats don't happen to like. What Democrats do now, Republicans will only imitate and escalate. No, thanks.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
No not really, and they're both grifters. Your argument is about relationships, and would excuse Hunter also.

What your false equivalency conveniently ignores is this: Without his family relationships, Hunter has no career. Same cannot be said about Mrs Thomas. She had a successful lobbyist career before she married, and her husband was not a SCOTUS justice at the time of the marriage.

You are making a pitifully weak ad hominem argument against an accomplished woman, just because you disagree with her politics.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
No not really, and they're both grifters. Your argument is about relationships, and would excuse Hunter also.
Why can't you just be honest?

You want Thomas removed by any means necessary so Dems can use the SC to push woke nonsense.
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sam Lowry said:

TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

TexasScientist said:

Sam Lowry said:

quash said:

Sam Lowry said:

HuMcK said:

Mothra said:

Remember he's a self- described conservative. As a conservative, surely he's hoping for some sort of slap on the wrist. Surely he wouldn't want Thomas to resign and see the conservative balance of the court shift.

You are mixing up the term "conservative" with "partisan". People like Oso, Sam, Tx Scientist, etc, those are conservatives, mostly consistent in their beliefs and try to avoid hypocrisy. People who hope for a slap on the wrist punishment for open corruption in order to preserve their political power aren't conservatives, they are partisan ideologues. A synonym would be "zealot" or "fanatic".
I hate to disagree after those kind words. But as strange as it may sound, I truly don't believe there should be an enforceable ethics code for SCOTUS. It would violate the separation of powers, and it would further politicize an already too politicized court. The current controversy demonstrates my point. It's a minor issue, an appearance of impropriety at worst, but it's being played up as a major scandal on par with the worst kinds of corruption. If they can do it to Justice Thomas, they can do it to others regardless of whether they're conservative or liberal. It's an invitation to permanent dysfunction and paralysis.

The policy doesn't have to be set by Congress, SCOTUS can adopt their procedures.

I think they have more or less adopted the same standards, it's just that no one outside SCOTUS can enforce them.
Then, you must think that should apply all the way down the federal judiciary.
SCOTUS is different because it was created expressly by the Constitution. Lower courts had to be created by Congress.
So you don't believe Congress can pass laws regulating justices' ethical conduct?
It's debatable, but in my opinion, no. More important, they shouldn't. I've heard two main arguments for it, neither of which is persuasive.

The first argument is that regulation by Congress would improve trust and safeguard the Court's reputation with the public. I believe it would have the opposite effect. The current controversy well demonstrates this. The allegations against Thomas are petty, at most. There's no evidence of anything like actual bribery or influence. Imagine what partisan critics of the Court could do with the laws you're proposing. There would be an endless series of ideological attacks in the guise of ethical issues, most of them highly technical and all of them subject to emotionally and politically charged debate in Congress and the media. It would be like another Kavanaugh hearing every year. The public's cynicism would only increase as a result.

The second argument is that, while it is essential for the justices to maintain decisional independence, they are already subject to the power of the purse and the regulation of their day-to-day operations. But in fact the proposed ethical laws would threaten their decisional independence in the worst way. They would be constantly aware of the threat of congressional hearings, with all the inflammatory rhetoric, political spin, and public spectacle I described above.

And let's be honest -- that's the whole point of all this. It's what the proponents of the legislation want. They already have the power to impeach, but impeaching on such flimsy charges would look exactly like the raw power grab that it is. An official code of ethics would provide a kind of shortcut. Violation of the code would itself become an issue, if not sufficient to warrant impeachment then at least sufficient to fuel hysterical media coverage and public outrage until the justice is forced to resign. None of this helps the country or serves any purpose except to thwart jurisprudence that the Democrats don't happen to like. What Democrats do now, Republicans will only imitate and escalate. No, thanks.
Good points. But I think it could be crafted in a way to prevent or minimize serious political harassment. Maybe an ethical panel made up of appellate court judges.

I don't think the allegations against Thomas are petty. Accepting over $500,000 of vacation gifts, real estate deals for his mother, and tuition payments to elite schools for the child he is raising from essentially one person is alarming. We don't seem to have judges on the federal bench being overly harassed, and they have standards to which they are held accountable. A SC without accountability is unacceptable.

We hold officials in the other branches accountable for their actions, so far without turning the system upside down. Although, it remains to be seen if presidents are accountable for their actions.
LIB,MR BEARS
How long do you want to ignore this user?
" Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend."

Boiler plate response.
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
No not really, and they're both grifters. Your argument is about relationships, and would excuse Hunter also.

What your false equivalency conveniently ignores is this: Without his family relationships, Hunter has no career. Same cannot be said about Mrs Thomas. She had a successful lobbyist career before she married, and her husband was not a SCOTUS justice at the time of the marriage.

You are making a pitifully weak ad hominem argument against an accomplished woman, just because you disagree with her politics.
You don't know that. He has a law degree that I'm sure he can use in some fashion, although given his history I question if he should remain admitted to the bar.

Her career took off after she married Thomas in '87. Her politics are self serving. Once he was appointed to the federal bench, attempts at influencing her husband are not acceptable. The fact is, she now has a family relationship to someone of power, analogous to Hunter. If she were not married to Thomas, it is doubtful her lobbying career in itself would have earned her access to the WH chief of staff for phone calls and texting.
TexasScientist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Doc Holliday said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
No not really, and they're both grifters. Your argument is about relationships, and would excuse Hunter also.
Why can't you just be honest?

You want Thomas removed by any means necessary so Dems can use the SC to push woke nonsense.
Don't be silly. Your willingness to excuse bad behavior for partisan political reasons is symptomatic, and illustrates pervasive partisan attitudes in the country that are harmful to democracy.
Doc Holliday
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TexasScientist said:

Doc Holliday said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

whiterock said:

TexasScientist said:

Crow paid for private school for a relative Thomas said he was raising "as a son." "This is way outside the norm," said a former White House ethics lawyer.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-harlan-crow-private-school-tuition-scotus

by Joshua Kaplan, Justin Elliott and Alex Mierjeski
ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they're published.


In 2008, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas decided to send his teenage grandnephew to Hidden Lake Academy, a private boarding school in the foothills of northern Georgia. The boy, Mark Martin, was far from home. For the previous decade, he had lived with the justice and his wife in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. Thomas had taken legal custody of Martin when he was 6 years old and had recently told an interviewer he was "raising him as a son."
Tuition at the boarding school ran more than $6,000 a month. But Thomas did not cover the bill. A bank statement for the school from July 2009, buried in unrelated court filings, shows the source of Martin's tuition payment for that month: the company of billionaire real estate magnate Harlan Crow.
[url=https://propublica.org/][/url]
The payments extended beyond that month, according to Christopher Grimwood, a former administrator at the school. Crow paid Martin's tuition the entire time he was a student there, which was about a year, Grimwood told ProPublica.

"Harlan picked up the tab," said Grimwood, who got to know Crow and the Thomases and had access to school financial information through his work as an administrator.

Before and after his time at Hidden Lake, Martin attended a second boarding school, Randolph-Macon Academy in Virginia. "Harlan said he was paying for the tuition at Randolph-Macon Academy as well," Grimwood said, recalling a conversation he had with Crow during a visit to the billionaire's Adirondacks estate.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.

Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

ProPublica interviewed Martin, his former classmates and former staff at both schools. The exact total Crow paid for Martin's education over the years remains unclear. If he paid for all four years at the two schools, the price tag could have exceeded $150,000, according to public records of tuition rates at the schools.
Thomas did not report the tuition payments from Crow on his annual financial disclosures. Several years earlier, Thomas disclosed a gift of $5,000 for Martin's education from another friend. It is not clear why he reported that payment but not Crow's.

The tuition payments add to the picture of how the Republican megadonor has helped fund the lives of Thomas and his family.

"You can't be having secret financial arrangements," said Mark W. Bennett, a retired federal judge appointed by President Bill Clinton. Bennett said he was friendly with Thomas and declined to comment for the record about the specifics of Thomas' actions. But he said that when he was on the bench, he wouldn't let his lawyer friends buy him lunch.

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=1318&q=75&w=2000&s=2f6349679f0cd252fa35f21ecb4b5f1e

Thomas did not respond to questions. In response to previous ProPublica reporting on gifts of luxury travel, he said that the Crows "are among our dearest friends" and that he understood he didn't have to disclose the trips.
ProPublica sent Crow a detailed list of questions and his office responded with a statement that did not dispute the facts presented in this story.

"Harlan Crow has long been passionate about the importance of quality education and giving back to those less fortunate, especially at-risk youth," the statement said. "It's disappointing that those with partisan political interests would try to turn helping at-risk youth with tuition assistance into something nefarious or political." The statement added that Crow and his wife have "supported many young Americans" at a "variety of schools, including his alma mater." Crow went to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Crow did not address a question about how much he paid in total for Martin's tuition. Asked if Thomas had requested the support for either school, Crow's office responded, "No."

Last month, ProPublica reported that Thomas accepted luxury travel from Crow virtually every year for decades, including international superyacht cruises and private jet flights around the world. Crow also paid money to Thomas and his relatives in an undisclosed real estate deal, ProPublica found. After he purchased the house where Thomas' mother lives, Crow poured tens of thousands of dollars into improving the property. And roughly 15 years ago, Crow donated much of the budget of a political group founded by Thomas' wife, which paid her a $120,000 salary.

"This is way outside the norm. This is way in excess of anything I've seen," said Richard Painter, former chief White House ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, referring to the cascade of gifts over the years.
Painter said that when he was at the White House, an official who'd taken what Thomas had would have been fired: "This amount of undisclosed gifts? You'd want to get them out of the government."
A federal law passed after Watergate requires justices and other officials to publicly report most gifts. Ethics law experts told ProPublica they believed Thomas was required by law to disclose the tuition payments because they appear to be a gift to him.

Justices also must report many gifts to their spouses and dependent children.

But that argument was far-fetched, experts said, because minor children rarely pay their own tuition. Typically, the legal guardian is responsible for the child's education.

"The most reasonable interpretation of the statute is that this was a gift to Thomas and thus had to be reported. It's common sense," said Kathleen Clark, an ethics law expert at Washington University in St. Louis. "It's all to the financial benefit of Clarence Thomas."

Martin, now in his 30s, told ProPublica he was not aware that Crow paid his tuition. But he defended Thomas and Crow, saying he believed there was no ulterior motive behind the real estate magnate's largesse over the decades. "I think his intentions behind everything is just a friend and just a good person," Martin said.
Crow has long been an influential figure in pro-business conservative politics. He has given millions to efforts to move the law and the judiciary to the right and serves on the boards of think tanks that publish scholarship advancing conservative legal theories.

Crow has denied trying to influence the justice but has said he extended hospitality to him just as he has to other dear friends. From the start, their relationship has intertwined expensive gifts and conservative politics. In a recent interview with The Dallas Morning News, Crow recounted how he first met Thomas. In 1996, the justice was scheduled to give a speech in Dallas for an anti-regulation think tank. Crow offered to fly him there on his private jet. "During that flight, we found out we were kind of simpatico," the billionaire said.

The following year, the Thomases began to discuss taking custody of Martin. His father, Thomas' nephew, had been imprisoned in connection with a drug case. Thomas has written that Martin's situation held deep resonance for him because his own father was absent and his grandparents had taken him in "under very similar circumstances."
Thomas had an adult son from a previous marriage, but he and wife, Ginni, didn't have children of their own. They pitched Martin's parents on taking the boy in.

"Thomas explained that the boy would have the best of everything his own room, a private school education, lots of extracurricular activities," journalists Kevin Merida and Michael Fletcher reported in their biography of Thomas.

Thomas gained legal custody of Martin and became his legal guardian around January 1998, according to court records.

Martin, who had been living in Georgia with his mother and siblings, moved to Virginia, where he lived with the justice from the ages of 6 to 19, he said.

Living with the Thomases came with an unusual perk: lavish travel with Crow and his family. Martin told ProPublica that he and Thomas vacationed with the Crows "at least once a year" throughout his childhood.
That included visits to Camp Topridge, Crow's private resort in the Adirondacks, and two cruises on Crow's superyacht, Martin said. On a trip in the Caribbean, Martin recalled riding jet skis off the side of the billionaire's yacht.

Roughly 20 years ago, Martin, Thomas and the Crows went on a cruise on the yacht in Russia and the Baltics, according to Martin and two other people familiar with the trip. The group toured St. Petersburg in a rented helicopter and visited the Yusupov Palace, the site of Rasputin's murder, said one of the people. They were joined by Chris DeMuth, then the president of the conservative think tank the American Enterprise Institute. (Thomas' trips with Crow to the Baltics and the Caribbean have not previously been reported.)

Thomas reconfigured his life to balance the demands of raising a child with serving on the high court. He began going to the Supreme Court before 6 a.m. so he could leave in time to pick Martin up after class and help him with his homework. By 2001, the justice had moved Martin to private school out of frustration with the Fairfax County public school system's lax schedule, The American Lawyer magazine reported.

For high school, Thomas sent Martin to Randolph-Macon Academy, a military boarding school 75 miles west of Washington, D.C., where he was in the class of 2010. The school, which sits on a 135-acre campus in the Shenandoah Valley, charged between $25,000 to $30,000 a year. Martin played football and basketball, and the justice sometimes visited for games.

Randolph-Macon was also Crow's alma mater. Thomas and Crow visited the campus in April 2007 for the dedication of an imposing bronze sculpture of the Air Force Honor Guard, according to the school magazine. Crow donated the piece to Randolph-Macon, where it is a short walk from Crow Hall, a classroom building named after the Dallas billionaire's family.

Crow and Clarence Thomas attended the 2007 dedication of a statue gifted by Crow to Randolph-Macon Academy.

Martin sometimes chafed at the strictures of military school, according to people at Randolph-Macon at the time, and he spent his junior year at Hidden Lake Academy, a therapeutic boarding school in Georgia. Hidden Lake boasted one teacher for every 10 students and activities ranging from horseback riding to canoeing. Those services came at an added cost. At the time, a year of tuition was roughly $73,000, plus fees.

The July 2009 bank statement from Hidden Lake was filed in a bankruptcy case for the school, which later went under. The document shows that Crow Holdings LLC wired $6,200 to the school that month, the exact cost of the month's tuition. The wire is marked "Mark Martin" in the ledger.

Crow's office said in its statement that Crow's funding of students' tuition has "always been paid solely from personal funds, sometimes held at and paid through the family business."

Grimwood, the administrator at Hidden Lake, told ProPublica that Crow wired the school money once a month to pay Martin's tuition fees. Grimwood had multiple roles on the campus, including overseeing an affiliated wilderness program. He said he was speaking about the payments because he felt the public should know about outside financial support for Supreme Court justices. Martin returned to Randolph-Macon his senior year.
Thomas has long been one of the less wealthy members of the Supreme Court. Still, when Martin was in high school, he and Ginni Thomas had income that put them comfortably in the top echelon of Americans.
In 2006 for example, the Thomases brought in more than $500,000 in income. The following year, they made more than $850,000 from Clarence Thomas' salary from the court, Ginni Thomas' pay from the Heritage Foundation and book payments for the justice's memoir.

It appears that at some point in Martin's childhood, Thomas was paying for private school himself. Martin told ProPublica that Thomas sold his Corvette "his most prized car" to pay for a year of tuition, although he didn't remember when that occurred.

In 2002, a friend of Thomas' from the RV community who owned a Florida pest control company, Earl Dixon, offered Thomas $5,000 to help defray the costs of Martin's education. Thomas' disclosure of that earlier gift, several experts said, could be viewed as evidence that the justice himself understood he was required to report tuition aid from friends.

"At first, Thomas was worried about the propriety of the donation," Thomas biographers Merida and Fletcher recounted. "He agreed to accept it if the contribution was deposited directly into a special trust for Mark." In his annual filing, Thomas reported the money as an "education gift to Mark Martin."

?crop=focalpoint&fit=crop&fm=webp&fp-x=0.5&fp-y=0.5&h=619&q=75&w=2000&s=5e4461e7080970e707f2bcc40bea93d5
Did you actually read this, and read the link about Martin?

is there not a reasonable case to make that the gift was to Martin instead of Thomas?



However you want to slice it, especially in the judiciary, it has to be in the very least about the appearance of impropriety. Our form of government can't survive without character and integrity in the judiciary. This doesn't pass the ethical standards for any judges on judges sitting on federal bench.

Impropriety? Thomas steps forward and does something the very people criticizing him now would have criticized him for NOT doing.....a late-middle aged man taking on guardianship of the small child outside his immediate family....his sister's grandson. Then, instead of taking a minimalist approach....he gives the kid the best, private schools, etc.... He enlists others he knows, powerful people from his (white) wife's circle of contacts, to take an interest in the kid...to support the kid, a kid from a badly broken home who was facing a scenario of dysfunction from which few kids escape. He seeks legal advice on what support must be reported and not, and he heeds it. But some "experts" disagree with that legal advice, so praise the Lord we have you to step up to defend democracy by denouncing him as a crook, even though no one who has helped the kid has or has had business before the court.

I see no impropriety whatsoever. I see a good man doing the right things we expect good men to do. And it's to good effect: a black kid whose parents were unable to raise him now has Harlan Crow as a godfather. If Thomas was a Democrat, the glowing documentaries would already be on Netflix. The way I see it, the people attacking Thomas are discrediting themselves moreso than him. So by all means, carry on. Give a monkey enough rope and.....

Then you're blind, or blinded by partisanship. This is a relative's kid he took on to raise as his. It should stop there. He should pay from his own means. But no, he turns to his sugar daddy, for more candy from the jar he's been eating from for years. Sugar from a man who funds and sits on the board of a lobbying organization (that lobbies all branches but especially the judicial). At the very least, it smacks of the appearance of impropriety. Justices shouldn't be accepting welfare from wealthy donors, whether it is for kids they are raising as their own, or for lavish trips and vacations. Claims of altruism and noble motives is nothing more than a faade to excuse impropriety. It begs the question is this the tip of the iceberg?
Yes, he took on a kid he didn't have to take on, and helped the kid. And he asked others to help. And he asked for advice on when & how to report that help from others. And he followed that advice. Does he have report all of the teachers who gave that kid an A as a potential inducement on the court? Does he have to report the shift supervisor at McDonalds who gave that kid his first job as an effort to influence the court?

I.m trying to figure out if the diameter of your hat is as big as the diameter of your backside.


I'm sure your ok with Hunter's payments too.
Hunter is a grifter who monetized the office of his father, floating first from industry to industry, then from country to country, getting lucrative board positions solely because of his last name from people with interests before the USG. He not only failed to avoid appearances of impropriety, he clearly sought them out, over and over and over. Conflicts of interest can be highly lucrative if one does not care about appearances.

Mrs. Thomas is a career lobbyist who took a retainer from a customer she'd lobbied for in the past on issues she lobbies all the time.

The only case you have here is that, to maintain appearances, judges cannot marry anyone engaged in the political arena. Not a lobbyist, not an elected official, not even a leader from a group with political interest like, say, a union. For that matter, union members pay dues and those dues are used to lobby elected officials, so a judge really couldn't even marry a machinist from Detroit. Hell, for that matter, that machinist has a brother who's on social security and another brother who sells medicare supplemental insurance. Couldn't marry them, either, as they have clear political conflicts regarding federal entitlement and health care programs. I mean, the premise of your argument is that judges must maintain a bright line between themselves and politics, right?

Pardon the reductio ad absurdum exercise, but you do have a patently stupid premise to defend.
No not really, and they're both grifters. Your argument is about relationships, and would excuse Hunter also.
Why can't you just be honest?

You want Thomas removed by any means necessary so Dems can use the SC to push woke nonsense.
Don't be silly. Your willingness to excuse bad behavior for partisan political reasons is symptomatic, and illustrates pervasive partisan attitudes in the country that are harmful to democracy.
You have no proof of bad behavior by Thomas.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OsoCoreyell said:

Getting to the actual point, what evidence is there that this influenced his decision-making in his jurisprudence? Is there any? Did Crowe have business before the court?

There isn't an ethical code or law against having friends, even friends that help you and your family out.

Actually there is an ethical policy in play: avoid the appearance of impropriety.ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 9 and caption to Disciplinary Rule (DR) 9-101,
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

OsoCoreyell said:

Getting to the actual point, what evidence is there that this influenced his decision-making in his jurisprudence? Is there any? Did Crowe have business before the court?

There isn't an ethical code or law against having friends, even friends that help you and your family out.

Actually there is an ethical policy in play: avoid the appearance of impropriety.ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 9 and caption to Disciplinary Rule (DR) 9-101,
yes, now let congress do its job and make a decision on impeachment after investigation if they so choose to do one.. if they dont, i guess they felt it didnt rise to the level that some of yall believe it is..
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
Harrison Bergeron
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Black people really trigger this guy - he has more "stay
on the plantation" posts than anyone. He's definitely keeping the Democrat, we started the Klan, history alive and up top.
quash
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

quash said:

OsoCoreyell said:

Getting to the actual point, what evidence is there that this influenced his decision-making in his jurisprudence? Is there any? Did Crowe have business before the court?

There isn't an ethical code or law against having friends, even friends that help you and your family out.

Actually there is an ethical policy in play: avoid the appearance of impropriety.ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 9 and caption to Disciplinary Rule (DR) 9-101,
yes, now let congress do its job and make a decision on impeachment after investigation if they so choose to do one.. if they dont, i guess they felt it didnt rise to the level that some of yall believe it is..


Stay in your lane.

I never said this was impeachable, I merely cited the standard.

You get lost in the weeds every time I cite legal standards.
“Life, liberty, and property do not exist because men have made laws. On the contrary, it was the fact that life, liberty, and property existed beforehand that caused men to make laws in the first place.” (The Law, p.6) Frederic Bastiat
4th and Inches
How long do you want to ignore this user?
quash said:

4th and Inches said:

quash said:

OsoCoreyell said:

Getting to the actual point, what evidence is there that this influenced his decision-making in his jurisprudence? Is there any? Did Crowe have business before the court?

There isn't an ethical code or law against having friends, even friends that help you and your family out.

Actually there is an ethical policy in play: avoid the appearance of impropriety.ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 9 and caption to Disciplinary Rule (DR) 9-101,
yes, now let congress do its job and make a decision on impeachment after investigation if they so choose to do one.. if they dont, i guess they felt it didnt rise to the level that some of yall believe it is..


Stay in your lane.

I never said this was impeachable, I merely cited the standard.

You get lost in the weeds every time I cite legal standards.

is what you cited applicable to the issue at hand?
“The Internet is just a world passing around notes in a classroom.”

Jon Stewart
GrowlTowel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Round up a majority of the House and 67 senators. Otherwise, let it go.
whiterock
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4th and Inches said:

quash said:

OsoCoreyell said:

Getting to the actual point, what evidence is there that this influenced his decision-making in his jurisprudence? Is there any? Did Crowe have business before the court?

There isn't an ethical code or law against having friends, even friends that help you and your family out.

Actually there is an ethical policy in play: avoid the appearance of impropriety.ABA Code of Professional Responsibility, Canon 9 and caption to Disciplinary Rule (DR) 9-101,
yes, now let congress do its job and make a decision on impeachment after investigation if they so choose to do one.. if they dont, i guess they felt it didnt rise to the level that some of yall believe it is..
impeached for choice of spouse.

Don't you love it when liberals give conservatives a chance to defend Loving v. Virginia?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.