Clarence Thomas has struck again.
To his impressive list of recent supreme court victories – abolishing the right to an abortion, eradicating affirmative action, undermining federal regulations, and more – the ultraconservative justice can now add thwarting the criminal prosecution of Donald Trump for hoarding classified documents.
On Monday, Judge Aileen Cannon astonished the judicial world by dismissing the case. She did so based on a widely discredited legal argument that the special counsel who brought the prosecution, Jack Smith, had been improperly appointed.
The argument, initially aired by the former US president’s lawyers, had received scant support in judicial circles, given that stretching back a quarter of a century it has been repeatedly rejected by the courts. But there was one jurist who encouraged Cannon to pursue such contrarian thinking: Thomas.
I don’t really think that’s true. I think you could offer him a large sum of money to do the right thing and he still wouldn’t do it. It’s not even like the bribes are that huge. John Oliver tried, and I know that it was too public of course, but I still think if some rich progressive person were to offer him 10 million dollars or something to not be a huge POS he still wouldn’t take the offer cause he also just happens to be a huge POS. Like the bribes are nice, but he does also just personally want to make America a christofascist hellhole.
I think it was Harlan Crow(sp?) that said they give Thomas gifts NOT to influence his rulings, but because he rules in ways they appreciate. So, it’s more for services rendered, less about influencing outcomes.
Which is the now-legal way to bribe politicians
That said “justice” conveniently ruled on. How surprising.
I mean, this is the same as a sex worker saying they don’t do butt stuff.
For what it’s worth, I respect sex workers. I don’t respect politicians that sell out of the American people, however. That might be one of the lowest things I can think of, in fact.