this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2024
307 points (98.4% liked)

politics

29200 readers
2360 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is reportedly facing a lawsuit alleging a failure to pay taxes.

With questions already being raised about Thomas and the other Supreme Court justices when it comes to determining whether they are following ethics rules, John Anthony Castro weighs in to explain his legal action, Newsweek reports.

"Castro, a long-shot Republican presidential candidate and tax attorney who filed a flurry of lawsuits seeking to remove former President Donald Trump from the GOP primary ballot, told Newsweek that he is filing suit against Thomas in a Virginia court under the Virginia Fraud Against Taxpayers Act (VFATA)," the outlet reported. "Although he mailed the complaint to the court on Friday, he expects it to take two business days for the court to process and file the case."

top 9 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nougat@kbin.social 48 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Thomas has faced immense scrutiny and calls for his resignation after it was reported that he failed to disclose several transactions, including a $267,230 loan that he received from wealthy friend Anthony Welters. Last year, an investigation from the Senate Finance Committee revealed that Thomas never repaid a "substantial portion" of that loan, raising concerns about whether the justice properly reported it in his tax filings.

Can you imagine a situation in your life where you needed US$267,230.00, and instead of going to a bank for that, you went to a friend who had that money to loan you, and then when you didn't pay it back, that friend was just, "Yeah, that's fine"?

[–] TheAuthor_13@lemm.ee 13 points 2 years ago (1 children)

What? You don’t have self-interested billionaires on speed dial too? It’s not so tough - all you’ll need is a lifetime appointment to the highest decision-making panel in the nation. And all it’ll cost is… well, your soul, morals, ethics (assuming they exist in the 1st place) and dignity.

Simple

[–] Nougat@kbin.social 18 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I decided to do a very little bit of math. That loaned amount is 0.026723% of one billion dollars.

If your net worth was about US$375,000.00, like a pretty normal person, that would be like loaning a friend US$100.00.

[–] agent_flounder@lemmy.world 8 points 2 years ago

Jesus that really puts it into perspective.

[–] moistclump@lemmy.world 22 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Huh. Some republicans are doing some okay things. I like that, we should encourage that.

[–] Maeve@kbin.social 11 points 2 years ago

I think motivations matter.

[–] FenrirIII@lemmy.world 6 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I doubt he's doing it for a good reason. This dude is nuts.

[–] HikingVet@lemmy.ca 8 points 2 years ago

Don't stop someone doing a good thing.

[–] Naja_Kaouthia@lemmy.world 7 points 2 years ago

They’re just eating each other now. It’s breathtaking.