Octopus Overlords

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Apr 25, 2023 10:47 am

If people are submitting forms and no one is checking them, then what in the actual f are we even doing anymore?

stessier wrote: Tue Apr 25, 2023 10:51 am I mean, someone can check but as the article notes, there is no enforcement mechanism for the Supreme Court.

stessier wrote: Tue Apr 25, 2023 9:41 am

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Apr 25, 2023 9:18 am Who the f rubber-stamped a form with a real estate transaction that had a blank space for the purchaser? Or is this a situation where the clerk knows better than to question the almighty Justices on the forms they submit?

Either way, as someone that literally had to submit a 14 page form to the state regarding my entire household's personal finances to *volunteer* as a local official, this is enraging.

The blank space was on a federal disclosure form. Are those approved by anyone or just filed somewhere?

Smoove_B wrote: Tue Apr 25, 2023 11:29 am

stessier wrote: Tue Apr 25, 2023 10:51 am I mean, someone can check but as the article notes, there is no enforcement mechanism for the Supreme Court.

Verifying all the information has been provided on the form vs requiring all the information is provided on the form are two separate issues, imho. If no one is even looking at them until something happens (like what malchior is suggesting), that goes to my wtf observation.

Not having the ability to force a Justice to provide information or not being able to do anything if they refuse is likely also a problem (as you've noted). Hell of a nation we have here, eh?

LordMortis wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 6:16 am And Supreme Court continue to wonder why the faith in the Courts continues to go down the shitter.

Carpet_pissr wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 8:53 am

LordMortis wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 6:16 am And Supreme Court continue to wonder why the faith in the Courts continues to go down the shitter.

Do they really wonder? They’re pretty smart, I think they all probably know. Roberts pretending to wonder, I’ll buy.

El Guapo wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:09 amI dunno. I think they are genuinely full of themselves and their roles, and do see themselves as faithfully applying the law and not as political actors. I also think that they think that faith in the courts is undermined by some combination of people not understanding them or what they are doing, and by political figures and the media.

malchior wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:25 pm

El Guapo wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:09 amI dunno. I think they are genuinely full of themselves and their roles, and do see themselves as faithfully applying the law and not as political actors. I also think that they think that faith in the courts is undermined by some combination of people not understanding them or what they are doing, and by political figures and the media.

They saw these things but I'm getting to the point it seem unreal that they'd be this out of touch with reality.

El Guapo wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:59 pm

malchior wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 12:25 pm

El Guapo wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 11:09 amI dunno. I think they are genuinely full of themselves and their roles, and do see themselves as faithfully applying the law and not as political actors. I also think that they think that faith in the courts is undermined by some combination of people not understanding them or what they are doing, and by political figures and the media.

They saw these things but I'm getting to the point it seem unreal that they'd be this out of touch with reality.

Have you met....people?

While billionaire real estate mogul Harlan Crow was lavishing Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas with luxury gifts, Thomas voted to strike down federal tenant protections that might hurt the profits of Crow’s company.

Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas voted to end federal tenant protections that his billionaire benefactor’s company says threatened its real estate profit margins, according to corporate documents reviewed by the Lever. Thomas did not disclose his relationship with real estate billionaire Harlan Crow, nor did he recuse himself from the 2021 case, despite its potential impact on Crow Holdings.

..

In August 2021, Thomas was one of the six justices who voted to strike down a federal administrative moratorium on evictions, originally enacted in September 2020 by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to halt the spread of COVID-19. In June, Thomas was one of four justices who voted to end the moratorium — but the majority voted to leave it in place because it was set to expire the following month.

Unagi wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 7:27 pm Honestly, my blind/(previously appropriate?) love for this country has seriously turned into a 'Is there a better place for my children to raise their families?' disposition in the last 7-8 years.

I never thought I would feel that way as I grew up (like many, I decorated my childhood bike in Red/White/Blue streamers for 4th-of-July parades), but now I could easily describe it as probably the best way to protect and support my germline - to entirely reject the direction this country is going, take no part... Sadly I don't have the funds to just grab the family and jump-ship as it were.

And, that's almost now being 'sealed' by the Thomas revelations combined with the newest members of the court.

Blackhawk wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 1:14 pm I wish leaving was an option (money aside, very few places allow disabled immigrants), but a surprising number of places seem to be following the same model that we are. I'm not sure there's going to be anywhere left to go.

Unagi wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 2:40 pm I've got my 'dream' set on New Zealand.

More or less no chance we will do anything like that... I mean... actually, I shouldn't say that these days.

El Guapo wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 2:41 pm

Unagi wrote: Thu Apr 27, 2023 2:40 pm I've got my 'dream' set on New Zealand.

More or less no chance we will do anything like that... I mean... actually, I shouldn't say that these days.

Big fan of sheep?

The 28-page report was released by the Republican senator Chuck Grassley, the then chairman of the Senate judiciary committee. It prominently included an unfounded and unverified claim that one of Kavanaugh’s accusers – a fellow Yale graduate named Deborah Ramirez – was “likely” mistaken when she alleged that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dormitory party because another Yale student was allegedly known for such acts.

The suggestion that Kavanaugh was the victim of mistaken identity was sent to the judiciary committee by a Colorado-based attorney named Joseph C Smith Jr, according to a non-redacted copy of a 2018 email obtained by the Guardian. Smith was a friend and former colleague of the judiciary committee’s then lead counsel, Mike Davis.

Smith was also a member of the Federalist Society, which strongly supported Kavanaugh’s supreme court nomination, and appears to have a professional relationship with the Federalist Society’s co-founder, Leonard Leo, whom he thanked in the acknowledgments of his book Under God: George Washington and the Question of Church and State.

A 2018 Senate investigation that found there was “no evidence” to substantiate any of the claims of sexual assault against the US supreme court justice Brett Kavanaugh contained serious omissions, according to new information obtained by the Guardian.

The 28-page report was released by the Republican senator Chuck Grassley, the then chairman of the Senate judiciary committee. It prominently included an unfounded and unverified claim that one of Kavanaugh’s accusers – a fellow Yale graduate named Deborah Ramirez – was “likely” mistaken when she alleged that Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at a dormitory party because another Yale student was allegedly known for such acts.

The suggestion that Kavanaugh was the victim of mistaken identity was sent to the judiciary committee by a Colorado-based attorney named Joseph C Smith Jr, according to a non-redacted copy of a 2018 email obtained by the Guardian. Smith was a friend and former colleague of the judiciary committee’s then lead counsel, Mike Davis.

Smith was also a member of the Federalist Society, which strongly supported Kavanaugh’s supreme court nomination, and appears to have a professional relationship with the Federalist Society’s co-founder, Leonard Leo, whom he thanked in the acknowledgments of his book Under God: George Washington and the Question of Church and State.

Smith wrote to Davis in the 29 September 2018 email that he was in a class behind Kavanaugh and Ramirez (who graduated in the class of 1987) and believed Ramirez was likely mistaken in identifying Kavanaugh.

Instead, Smith said it was a fellow classmate named Jack Maxey, who was a member of Kavanaugh’s fraternity, who allegedly had a “reputation” for exposing himself, and had once done so at a party. To back his claim, Smith also attached a photograph of Maxey exposing himself in his fraternity’s 1988 yearbook picture.

The allegation that Ramirez was likely mistaken was included in the Senate committee’s final report even though Maxey – who was described but not named – was not attending Yale at the time of the alleged incident.

Justice Alito says the marshal “did a good job with the resources that were available to her” and agrees that the evidence was insufficient for a public accusation. “I personally have a pretty good idea who is responsible, but that’s different from the level of proof that is needed to name somebody,” he says. He’s certain about the motive: “It was a part of an effort to prevent the Dobbs draft . . . from becoming the decision of the court. And that’s how it was used for those six weeks by people on the outside—as part of the campaign to try to intimidate the court.”

That campaign included unlawful assemblies outside justices’ homes, and that wasn’t the worst of it. “Those of us who were thought to be in the majority, thought to have approved my draft opinion, were really targets of assassination,” Justice Alito says. “It was rational for people to believe that they might be able to stop the decision in Dobbs by killing one of us.” On June 8, an armed man was arrested outside the home of Justice Brett Kavanaugh; the suspect was later charged with attempted assassination and has pleaded not guilty.

LordMortis wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 6:20 pm I dunno if it's whiny to criticize people with guns protesting outside of the homes of SC justices

he is completely out of touch with his position and the burdens he is placing on the people with his constitutional powers and how the SC is becoming a weapon of the tyrannical minority... Or perhaps even have become, while they sit on high with the literal value of their position purchased with cash and zeal.

Two years after John Roberts' confirmation as the Supreme Court's chief justice in 2005, his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, made a pivot. After a long and distinguished career as a lawyer, she refashioned herself as a legal recruiter, a matchmaker who pairs job-hunting lawyers up with corporations and firms.

Roberts told a friend that the change was motivated by a desire to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest, given that her husband was now the highest-ranking judge in the country. "There are many paths to the good life," she said. "There are so many things to do if you're open to change and opportunity."

And life was indeed good for the Robertses, at least for the years 2007 to 2014. During that eight-year stretch, according to internal records from her employer, Jane Roberts generated a whopping $10.3 million in commissions, paid out by corporations and law firms for placing high-dollar lawyers with them.

...

At least one of the firms that paid Jane Roberts — WilmerHale — later argued before SCOTUS. John Roberts did not recuse, and voted in favor of WilmerHale’s client.

LordMortis wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 6:20 pm I dunno if it's whiny to criticize people with guns protesting outside of the homes of SC justices but he is completely out of touch with his position and the burdens he is placing on the people with his constitutional powers and how the SC is becoming a weapon of the tyrannical minority... Or perhaps even have become, while they sit on high with the literal value of their position purchased with cash and zeal.

Holman wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 8:30 pm

LordMortis wrote: Fri Apr 28, 2023 6:20 pm I dunno if it's whiny to criticize people with guns protesting outside of the homes of SC justices but he is completely out of touch with his position and the burdens he is placing on the people with his constitutional powers and how the SC is becoming a weapon of the tyrannical minority... Or perhaps even have become, while they sit on high with the literal value of their position purchased with cash and zeal.

I am told by Republicans that protesting with guns is exactly what the Founders intended.

However, was there any other case than the guy who brought a gun near to Kavanaugh's house and who called 911 to ask for help because he knew he was having a mental health crisis?