Calls Increase for Clarence Thomas Recusal as to Trump (salaries, federal government, state)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Clarence Thomas was not appointed by Trump. He has no reason to recuse because his wife is a vocal supporter of Trump.
He supposed to recluse from any case she supports. And I posted the ethics rules. To even think he might influence or be influenced-just the optics makes it a no no. He knows this.
If he does not recluse himself because of the possible insinuations- he looses all credibility and will appears that’s gone rouge. Me, I don't think he cares. I think Anita Hill went over the top, but she did not make it all up. I personally don’t trust him and never have.
He supposed to recluse from any case she supports. And I posted the ethics rules. To even think he might influence or be influenced-just the optics makes it a no no. He knows this.
That is exactly why other wives have stayed out of politics to avoid the perception of bias in their decisions.
His wife can do whatever she wants. He, however, has a clear conflict of interests and needs to recuse himself from anything having to do with his wife's political activities.
No, he does not have a conflict of interest. You can't talk about a conflict of interest except in the context of a parttcular case.
This is too cut and dry...he'll recuse in cases concerning this matter. I imagine there will be pressure to from the the other justices...especially Roberts.
Your analysis is full of holes.
Look out in the real world at the insane double standard (i.e., lack of impartiality) the DOJ has regarding J6 defendants. There is no reason we should think that Kagan amd Sotomayor are less partial. Why aren't you calling for their recusal?
Look out in the real world at the insane double standard (i.e., lack of impartiality) the DOJ has regarding J6 defendants.
Where is there any lack of impartiality at DOJ? If none of their staffers are defendants and if their headquarters was not invaded there is nothing there for the prosecutors to be partial about.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hbdwihdh378y9
There is no reason we should think that Kagan amd Sotomayor are less partial. Why aren't you calling for their recusal?
You know, that is so far from a reasonable statement that it should not even be addressed.
no they need to understand the repercussions in their spouses jobs. The Supreme Court judge should be the most impeccable squeaky clean in all positions. Not a hair out of place. I don’t care if live in different houses - appearances - in this case- matters. He doesn’t need to quit - just stay out of said cases. Is that too much to ask?? Suppose it was your case against a big medical corp. and his wife is a big lobbyist for the medical field. Would you like that ?
If he does not recluse himself because of the possible insinuations- he looses all credibility and will appears that’s gone rouge. Me, I don't think he cares. I think Anita Hill went over the top, but she did not make it all up. I personally don’t trust him and never have.
A Black man turns red ?
You think RBG was objective ? No one said a word when she called Trump names.
You think RBG was objective ? No one said a word when she called Trump names.
Rogué. Misspell
He can be defiant and ignore everyone asking him to stay far from these cases, but he will lose his credibility.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.