Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Coke pubes AND tax fraud? "Clarence Thomas Didn't Report Wife's Income For Several Years"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Amerigo Vespucci Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:25 AM
Original message
Coke pubes AND tax fraud? "Clarence Thomas Didn't Report Wife's Income For Several Years"
January 22, 2011 07:00 AM
Common Cause: Clarence Thomas Didn't Report Wife's Income For Several Years

By Susie Madrak



http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/common-cause-clarence-thomas-didnt-re

I've looked into this before, and found there was a decision by the court several years ago in which they said they're weren't bound by the same ethics rules as other federal judges. (As I recall, the statement was along the lines of "We're Supreme Court justices, you should assume we wouldn't do anything unethical.") I don't know about you, but I'm immensely reassured:

WASHINGTONSupreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed over the course of at least five years to report his wife's income from a conservative think-tank on his financial disclosures, according to the watchdog group Common Cause.

Between 2003 and 2007, Virginia Thomas, a longtime conservative activist, was paid $686,589 by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, according to a Common Cause review of IRS records. Thomas failed to note the income in his financial disclosure forms for those years, choosing instead to check a box titled "none" where "spousal non-investment income" would normally be disclosed.

In his 2009 disclosure, Justice Thomas also reported spousal income as "none." Common Cause contends that Liberty Central paid Thomas an unknown salary during that year.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Cirque du So-What Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
1. Further proof of the corporate media's uselessness
I guarantee you're more likely to hear about Snooki's preparations for bikini season on the evening news than this highly unethical and illegal action on the part of a SC justice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
howaboutme Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:40 AM
Response to Reply #1
4. Bingo!
Corporate controlled media in partnership with government, and intent on keeping Americans informed about worthless trash or politically divided, instead of as they once did which was focusing on righting wrongs.

The two biggest threats to the USA are:
1- a controlled consolidated media and
2- a lack of organized political opposition (originally private sector organized labor served this function) to the corporatization of the USA.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfranklin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:30 AM
Response to Original message
2. It is not tax fraud...
he did not reveal her income on his financial disclosure forms which are supposed to bring conflicts of interest to light. He obviously realized that there was an ethical problem with her working for right wing propagandists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
neverforget Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. Imagine if a liberal justice did this. The amount of outrage and calls for
impeachment would be too great to ignore. But, this is a right winger, so it's all good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lint Head Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
5. Criminals are running our government and our media and We the People
just sit around and complain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Angry Dragon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
6. Time for him to step down
if he has any guts
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tanyev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
7. Hey, maybe $686,589.00 is such a tiny fraction of their income that he completely forgot about it.
It could happen.




:sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sal Minella Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #7
12. All I can think of is Thomas's comment in an interview a few years
back that he really did not enjoy being a Supreme Court justice, and "You can't make any money at it." Verbatim.

I daresay money has found a way to reach him since that statement -- if that statement wasn't a solicitation for bribes, I can't see a way to write one more directly.

Can't imagine living in a style where you consider $137,000 a year not worth reporting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jwirr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
8. He should resign. He broke the law willfully.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Octafish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 12:31 PM
Response to Original message
9. Jail the scofflaw, tax cheat creep.
Slappy, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kingofalldems Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 12:34 PM
Response to Original message
10. Isn't that a crime?
And I believe a charge of falsifying U.S. documents should be on the table.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kurovski Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-22-11 12:55 PM
Response to Original message
11. Oh, now, now. It was just a few bucks wifey made selling her homemade jam.
Now, just skooch! and go watch Jersey Shore. I think the little one is going to get smacked again soon...

Besides, we'll have a story about Democratic tax evasion soon enough, we'll run that for you 24/7 for three months. We think you'll enjoy that MUCH better, now won't you? I mean EVERYONE else will be talking about it, so you will too.


Won't you? I mean...you WANT to be like EVERYONE else, like a NORMAL person? RIGHT?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 23rd 2024, 07:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC