Considering they blame Thomas for everything that doesn't go their way and they tried to smear his reputation before becoming a Justice. I go with smear campaign, because the pattern fits.
Why Thomas specifically though? There are other justices who I hardly hear anything about like Alito, Gorsuch, or Barrett. It seems like among the Supreme Court, they pick on him because he has a lot of unreported and sketchy financial dealings.
Could be a few reasons, Biden has a history with Thomas going back to his conformation hearing, he's been a pretty solid constitutionalist, and an over all thorn in their sides. As for why target him specifically right now, I can only guess they might be getting out in front of some action he might make. Plant an early seed of discord as an attack vector. Maybe?
It's obviously a smear campaign. There are so many examples of people getting their college paid for. Look no further than the scholarship program, especially in sports. Sometimes friends of family give back and finance college education. Many older people view this as a way to giving back by helping someone else achieve their dream. The same people ask that the recipient do the same later in life.
Didn't read the article but the first thing that jumps out in the blurb is that the young man is NOT his son, but another relative. Supreme Court Justices make decent money, but not that much when compared to so many others (nor should they, imo) so someone who is very wealthy paying for this young man's education doesn't seem to be an issue to me. UNLESS of course, Thomas was making court decisions that pertained to that person. If not, it would be fine imo.
Public sector employees can't receive gifts or even free meals. Sure, vacations are one thing, but having your friend cover tuition for your grand nephew and covering your mom's housing costs seems a little over the top.
Public sector employees can certainly receive gifts or free meals. But not bribes, which the free stuff would be if it was coming from someone who needed the employee to make a ruling in their favor. They haven't shown us anything Thomas did in return.
I don't buy the "paying it forward" part. Crow was never a student at Hidden Lake Academy. His only connection to it is through Thomas. And the cost is significant, over ~$5,000 a month. As for the house, Crow bought it and paid for all the up keep while allowing Thomas' mother to live there for free. As a Supreme court Justice, Thomas makes over $285,000 a year and has an estimated net worth of over $24 Million. He is perfectly capable of taking care of his own mother.
All these things offer leverage. If you don't have a problem with any of the ethical considerations here, then I don't know why there were so many complaints about Hunter Biden getting gets and favors because of who his dad was. I mean, who are we to tell these Ukrainian billionaires that they can't help their friends and be generous.
I don't really care what the WH ethics lawyer thinks and don't try to pass this off as Crow just taking interest in an at risk teen. If he wasn't related to Thomas, Crow wouldn't directly be paying his tuition. It's not even layered under something like a "scholarship" or non-profit organization. It's nefarious because Thomas has been hiding it because it looks corrupt.
If it was the same situation with George Soros and someone like Sotomayor, we would rally and say it's time to drain the swamp.
I do believe White House ethics lawyer is an oxymoron at this point in time.
So any hearsay coming from an ethics lawyer is an automatic smear.
They are extremely desperate to get Thomas off the SC before he quashes their appeals when they get convicted for their crimes. They are finally seeing the road they have been on, and there is no exit between here and hell.
Look as his record, the results. Not what people say ABOUT him. Same with Trump, only President in my lifetime that has a record of doing things that help people and not themselves. And what a record. Ignore the BS.
If you really believe this, do you think the same about Hunter Biden? He was able to get cushy well paying positions and all kinds of perks because of who his Dad is. But since Biden was only vice president (with no real legislative power), then I guess it's fine and everyone here is just overreacting.
This is like a romance drama. The poor family relation gets pregnant by a wealthy man, who abandons the young woman & his responsibility for the child he created. She continues to struggle until a male family member steps in and raises the child. As her family member is a person of standing in his country, he sees to it the rich man takes responsibility.
Considering they blame Thomas for everything that doesn't go their way and they tried to smear his reputation before becoming a Justice. I go with smear campaign, because the pattern fits.
Why Thomas specifically though? There are other justices who I hardly hear anything about like Alito, Gorsuch, or Barrett. It seems like among the Supreme Court, they pick on him because he has a lot of unreported and sketchy financial dealings.
Could be a few reasons, Biden has a history with Thomas going back to his conformation hearing, he's been a pretty solid constitutionalist, and an over all thorn in their sides. As for why target him specifically right now, I can only guess they might be getting out in front of some action he might make. Plant an early seed of discord as an attack vector. Maybe?
Is your post title intentionally fucked up?
It’s a possessive, possessive.
Thomas’ son = possessive
Thomas’ son’s private tuition = possessive
Are you talking about the apostrophe after Thomas?
It's obviously a smear campaign. There are so many examples of people getting their college paid for. Look no further than the scholarship program, especially in sports. Sometimes friends of family give back and finance college education. Many older people view this as a way to giving back by helping someone else achieve their dream. The same people ask that the recipient do the same later in life.
Didn't read the article but the first thing that jumps out in the blurb is that the young man is NOT his son, but another relative. Supreme Court Justices make decent money, but not that much when compared to so many others (nor should they, imo) so someone who is very wealthy paying for this young man's education doesn't seem to be an issue to me. UNLESS of course, Thomas was making court decisions that pertained to that person. If not, it would be fine imo.
The srticles states: 'the Crows “are among our dearest friends”...' Are justices not allowed besties who want to bless a relative?
Public sector employees can't receive gifts or even free meals. Sure, vacations are one thing, but having your friend cover tuition for your grand nephew and covering your mom's housing costs seems a little over the top.
Public sector employees can certainly receive gifts or free meals. But not bribes, which the free stuff would be if it was coming from someone who needed the employee to make a ruling in their favor. They haven't shown us anything Thomas did in return.
I don't buy the "paying it forward" part. Crow was never a student at Hidden Lake Academy. His only connection to it is through Thomas. And the cost is significant, over ~$5,000 a month. As for the house, Crow bought it and paid for all the up keep while allowing Thomas' mother to live there for free. As a Supreme court Justice, Thomas makes over $285,000 a year and has an estimated net worth of over $24 Million. He is perfectly capable of taking care of his own mother.
All these things offer leverage. If you don't have a problem with any of the ethical considerations here, then I don't know why there were so many complaints about Hunter Biden getting gets and favors because of who his dad was. I mean, who are we to tell these Ukrainian billionaires that they can't help their friends and be generous.
I don't really care what the WH ethics lawyer thinks and don't try to pass this off as Crow just taking interest in an at risk teen. If he wasn't related to Thomas, Crow wouldn't directly be paying his tuition. It's not even layered under something like a "scholarship" or non-profit organization. It's nefarious because Thomas has been hiding it because it looks corrupt.
If it was the same situation with George Soros and someone like Sotomayor, we would rally and say it's time to drain the swamp.
There is a tremendous amount of dirt being deployed against Thomas now, that is not new info.
There's obviously a decision that black hats want to intimidate him out of making.
His actions all seem to be that of a patriot and an honest one.
If there is a hidden quid-pro-quo then there could be an issue, otherwise not really.
I do believe White House ethics lawyer is an oxymoron at this point in time.
So any hearsay coming from an ethics lawyer is an automatic smear.
They are extremely desperate to get Thomas off the SC before he quashes their appeals when they get convicted for their crimes. They are finally seeing the road they have been on, and there is no exit between here and hell.
Look as his record, the results. Not what people say ABOUT him. Same with Trump, only President in my lifetime that has a record of doing things that help people and not themselves. And what a record. Ignore the BS.
Definitely a smear campaign.
smear all the way - wake up
Is charity a crime?? Does this "bllionaire" have a case before the SC, No on both? Then shut up.
If you really believe this, do you think the same about Hunter Biden? He was able to get cushy well paying positions and all kinds of perks because of who his Dad is. But since Biden was only vice president (with no real legislative power), then I guess it's fine and everyone here is just overreacting.
'the Crows “are among our dearest friends”...' They are besties not maffia, drug dealers or partners in crime.
A cornered animal lashes out
You mean outside the norm of what other Justices have been up to, or outside the norm of what gifts public officials can receive?
This is like a romance drama. The poor family relation gets pregnant by a wealthy man, who abandons the young woman & his responsibility for the child he created. She continues to struggle until a male family member steps in and raises the child. As her family member is a person of standing in his country, he sees to it the rich man takes responsibility.
Sorta Mediocre gets drunk at Brandon parties and leaks opinions, and takes bribes. Is that OK?