(04-10-2023 10:17 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-08-2023 07:37 PM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(04-08-2023 04:41 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  

(04-08-2023 12:36 AM)Rice93 Wrote:  

(04-07-2023 09:00 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  One thing missing in this mess of innuendo is any proof that he sold his vote, or even that there was ever any vote that might have helped his friend.

So the bottom line is that he did not report gifts that did not have to be reported.

Swampy AF though, right?

The left has for decades denied that there even IS a swamp.... and then when they can't find anything 'illegal' that someone has done, but they want to try and cast shade, they define that word they denied existed as something that suits the situation they want to cast shade upon and 'that is it'.

No. Gifts between people who are friends... trips to a friend's ranch are NOT 'swamp'. It doesn't even remotely suit the word in its 'regular' definition.

Nobody becomes a millionaire as a public servant by taking vacations with friends. No 'justice' is thwarted by it either. Can that friend who takes them on vacation ALSO be part of the swamp?? Of course... but you have to have some REAL corruption and insider dealings first, otherwise it isn't 'swamp'.

I mean, it would be great if politicians and judges all partied and vacationed only with poor people, but that's just not realistic.

Speaking for myself here, and I have never denied the existence of a swamp.

I’m surprised that you don’t think the fact that a political operative has treated a Supreme Court Justice to gifts likely totaling well-north of seven figures is swampy.

Sorry, but this “Hey, it’s just a couple of friends hanging out” isn’t really passing the smell test for me. Where and when did this great friendship start? Were they high school buddies? Participants on the same college a cappella group? Or did this guy seek Thomas out after he was already a federal judge or a Supreme Court justice and start lavishing him with gifts?

I did not say that Thomas has done anything illegal. But it sure seems swampy to me.

The fact that you have to change what I said to 'hey, it's just a couple of friends hanging out' is telling. It means that you've decided what this is before you've even looked at it.... so you have to assign an absurd statement to me- as if I said it... to dismiss it.

The fact that you had to whaddabout "the left" denying existence of the swamp when it had nothing to do with my post is telling.

As for "it's just a couple of friends hanging out"... isn't that basically what you said? How is that absurd?

Quote:My first question would be, who 'valued' these gifts? I have a friend with a place in the hill country. It's probably a $2mm home and they always take good care of us when we visit. If they were to AirBNB the place (they have another that they do, so these numbers are real) that they rent out for $350/night, which would cost us more like $450 after the fees.... not for the home, but for just the 'wing' that we use.... and the food would probably cost us $100 pp/pd. Now we sometimes help with the cooking or clean-up, but they could just as easily have 'help' that does it all for us. They sometimes do. They probably give us thousands of dollars per year in 'vacations'. I have another friend who took me to their ranch.... 9,000 acres... Probably $1,000/day if you wanted to rent the BUNK house, much less the main... If you wanted to hunt, it would easily be $2500pp.... and while nice, this wasn't a fancy home. It wouldnt have been $500k in Houston suburbs.... but of course it's on 9,000 acres in west Texas with live water.... so..... AND this guy was an official in a relatively recent administration... so 'politically active'. They hosted a 'destination wedding' for one of their kids and in addition to all of this, gave those 'in the wedding' gifts worth easily $1,000 each. I doubt you could sell them for anywhere near that, but that is what it cost to make them. I attended another friend's wedding where the 7 course meal had different wine pairings for each course... probably $500 per person in value. They had connections so they probably didn't pay that, but I'm sure it wasn't at all 'cheap'... and it would have easily cost me that to replicate it... even though I probably never would.

Yeah... I also have some friends that have nice vacation homes and private planes. I understand the economics of the "value" they are providing when we travel with them (I typically offer to at least pay my share of the airplane fuel but these friends aren't on the same financial footing as Thomas' buddy).

I think it's pretty easy to say that flying a private jet to Indonesia and scooting around there on a nice yacht is easily a 6-figure vacation. Not sure it matters if it's $125k or 500k at that point.

Quote:Now I admit these aren't the same scale, but the difference between the 'value' and the 'cost' are pretty substantial in each case.

I didn't meet either of these people in college... and they treat other friends with the same hospitality... it is just who they are.... and they started 'lavishing me with these gifts'. The wedding friend I DID meet in college.... and of course, others have 'done for me' and 'me for them' over the years. It's what friends do.

Agree. I wonder what Thomas is doing for his buddy.

Quote: Some of them absolutely became friends of mine based on our professions... and the circles that we ran in... Most of the people they 'entertain' like this fall into TWO categories... not one... One as you note is 'lifelong friends' and the other is 'friends of affinity'. People who are active in politics spend most of their time around other politically active people... OF COURSE it can also be swampy... but you're just assuming it

It IS swampy. By that I mean there is an obvious perception of a potential conflict of interest/corruption. The perception is likely just as bad as actual corruption these days given the general public's confidence in our court system.

Quote:.... and yet I could probably show you the same thing with Biden or Clinton or any of a number of other people, and you might shrug if I started just tossing around inferences.

I doubt that. This isn't a partisan issue by any means for me.

Quote:These people travel in circles that most of us don't.... and they own things like ranches and yachts and planes. These are expensive things to let friends use or to put at their disposal, but they are not things that others can monetize. You seem to dismiss this, but put yourself in this situation....

I'm not dismissing this. He's been lavishing him with gifts for 25 years or so but I'm not sure that there is a real friendship there beyond that. It seems swampy.

Quote:If a good friend offered you a private plan to take you to a private island for a week with all expenses paid... would you take that (just making up a number) $50,000 gift? Probably. Would you pay for that trip yourself? Probably not.

If the friend was somebody who had an obvious political agenda, and I was in Thomas' position, I would make DAMN SURE that I reported it (even if the fine print suggested that MAYBE I could get away without reporting it).

He was worried enough about it to ask around to see if he needed to report it. If it was a potential issue why not just report it?

I would also not let a true friend continually lavish me with gifts without responding in kind at a level to which I was able. Is there evidence that Thomas did this?

Quote: Even if you wanted to take that trip, you might fit it into a budget of perhaps more like $5,000. So.... if you're now going to 'sell' your vote on something... Are you going to accept a $50,000 trip... a one and done?? Or would you rather have $50,000 in cash, and then upgrade your $5k vacation to 10k.... on a very different, but also very similar vacation... and then put the 40k into creating vastly greater wealth?

Didn't say Thomas was selling his vote... I said it was swampy. Who else was on these vacations that might have had business before the court?

Quote:Wealthy and powerful people do wealthy and powerful people things... things that most people only dream about... and some would sell their soul for... but wealthy and powerful people won't sell their souls for that.

Rich people do cool stuff. Thanks. I got it.

Quote:But regardless of all that, this isn't what the 'swamp' is. You're alleging simple corruption.

Nope... I'm saying that it seems to be essential to maintain strict ethical standards to preserve the credibility and trustworthiness of the judiciary. Stuff like this... "Hey... do I really have to report the millions in gifts that this Republican operative has been showering me with?"... works against that.

Quote: That has little to nothing to do with what most people refer to as the swamp. It is telling that the 'documentary' about 'The Swamp' was put out during the Trump administration... the guy who mostly ran on 'draining the swamp' (whether or not he meant it) and it chronicles three Republicans and attacks Trump. So precisely what I mean by Democrats taking something that has been in the vernacular for decades... and turning it into something that they can use for political power. They quite literally are engaging in swampy behaviour while trying to cast shade against their political enemies. While certainly Trump engaged in 'swampy' behavior while in office, and worse... but he didn't invent it or create it. He clearly didn't put it in place.... guys like Biden did.... so when Trump starts trying to shine the light on things (which regardless of his personal intentions, resonated with his voters) the 'swamp' of course turns it on him and protects itself... quite literally installing a 50 year member of the swamp, who is clearly being 'handled' by the swamp because he is just the figurehead... to lead it. I mean, you couldn't script a more obvious example.

What does this have to do with Clarence Thomas and his friend?

Quote:The swamp is the system that wields its power to protect those within it... and attack those who threaten it. Yes, it involves corruption, but it isn't merely about corruption..... and you're only ALLEGING corruption...against one of the left's favorite targets. It's about the control of the information that people get... what we know and how we know it. It's about manipulation. Said simply, its about creating a system where the system creates things for the people to fear... and the only protection offered to the people comes from the system itself.... and then they profit from the argument about whether or not the problem would exist were it not for the system, or whether or not the system is the only thing that can solve the problem. They profit from the problem, not the solution. They profit from the accusation of Thomas... whether or not he did anything that they could or should fix.

I think of the swamp as powerful people connected to politics who enrich themselves as a result of their positions all-the-while going to lengths to obfuscate said behavior.