SebastianBlue
President, International Julian Alvarez Fan Club
- Joined
- 25 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 57,736
Again, there will be more. It is a slow drip of corruption and quid pro quo. And based on latest polls, it is absolutely decimating the legitimacy of the Supreme Court, which once was the only one of the three branches with any credibility in the eyes of the general populace.
Thomas (and a few other justices) should be impeached.
But they won’t be. And there goes any legitimacy the high courts still had.
“In January 2005, though, the court declined to hear an appeal from an architecture firm that wanted more than $25 million from Trammell Crow Residential Co. for allegedly misusing copyrighted building designs. When the court issued a one-sentence order denying the petition, there were no noted recusals — indicating that Thomas participated — and no noted dissents.
The Crow family had a non-controlling interest in the company at the time, according to a statement to Bloomberg from Harlan Crow’s office. Thomas had already reported a 1997 private flight and high-dollar gifts from Crow, both documented in a December 2004 report from the Los Angeles Times. The justice had described Crow and his wife Kathy as “personal friends.””
www.bloomberg.com
By the way, the December 2004 LA Times stores referenced in the article just happens to be when Thomas stopped reporting the in-kind gifts he was receiving from Crow, a month before the Tramell Crow Residential Co case came before the Supreme Court. Convenient timing.
This is why his claims that he “didn’t know the gifts needed to be disclosed” are absolute poppycock. He not only knew he should be disclosing them, but he had been up until the LA Times story publicising his cushy relationship with Crow. He stopped because he wanted to continue the quid pro quo without the scrutiny.
Thomas (and a few other justices) should be impeached.
But they won’t be. And there goes any legitimacy the high courts still had.
“In January 2005, though, the court declined to hear an appeal from an architecture firm that wanted more than $25 million from Trammell Crow Residential Co. for allegedly misusing copyrighted building designs. When the court issued a one-sentence order denying the petition, there were no noted recusals — indicating that Thomas participated — and no noted dissents.
The Crow family had a non-controlling interest in the company at the time, according to a statement to Bloomberg from Harlan Crow’s office. Thomas had already reported a 1997 private flight and high-dollar gifts from Crow, both documented in a December 2004 report from the Los Angeles Times. The justice had described Crow and his wife Kathy as “personal friends.””
Clarence Thomas’s Billionaire Friend Did Have Business Before the Supreme Court
Justice Clarence Thomas said he was advised he didn’t have to disclose private jet flights and luxury vacations paid for by billionaire Harlan Crow because, although a close friend, Crow “did not have business before the court.”
www.bloomberg.com
By the way, the December 2004 LA Times stores referenced in the article just happens to be when Thomas stopped reporting the in-kind gifts he was receiving from Crow, a month before the Tramell Crow Residential Co case came before the Supreme Court. Convenient timing.
This is why his claims that he “didn’t know the gifts needed to be disclosed” are absolute poppycock. He not only knew he should be disclosing them, but he had been up until the LA Times story publicising his cushy relationship with Crow. He stopped because he wanted to continue the quid pro quo without the scrutiny.
Last edited:
