For years, conservative billionaires have treated Supreme Court justice Clarence Thomas to opulent vacations and trips on their private jets. If these were anything other than disinterested gifts, then they’re taxable — and Thomas owes the IRS a huge bill.
    • ruleman@feddit.nl
      14·
      11 months ago

      If the public reacts defeated, nothing will happen. If there is public outrage, there is a political cost and change might actually happen.

      You are the public, your defeatism is self fulfilling.

      So please try another comment, this one (even though you don’t want it to) supports abuse of power.

      • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        11·
        11 months ago

        The belief that politics reacts to public outrage is also a mechanism of control by the system, when in reality it only offers up sacrificial, insignificant lambs like Santos, always keeping the actual power players safe.

        If the outage we see over police killings hasn’t shifted our central government one iota (and it hasn’t; even Biden has been calling for MORE police than pre-George Floyd, nevermind Republicans), what do you think this is going to do?

        Politics changes when politicians die and are replaced by ones who believe something else.

        • Boff@beehaw.org
          2·
          11 months ago

          That’s what the people in power want us to think because it ferments fear which populist/fascist leaders take advantage of to claim their own power.

          Real, lasting change is incremental change powered by passionate and peaceful people

    • Hirom@beehaw.org
      4·
      11 months ago

      I don’t know. Tax authorities can be relentless when someone get caught committing shameless tax fraud.

      There might not be enforceable penalty for ethics violation at the supreme court. But there definitely are penalties for tax fraud. Obligatory Al Capone reference.

      • Samus Crankpork@beehaw.org
        3·
        11 months ago

        Who enforces them though? The Supreme Court has shown that it doesn’t believe in conflicts of interest or recusing from cases, and all he needs to do is contest the rulings until they land on his desk.

        • Hirom@beehaw.org
          4·
          11 months ago

          That’s a defeatist attitude. Challenging this up to the supreme court would draw even more attention to the case, which Thomas may not want. Even if he did, there’s no telling what the court would decide. To my knowledge he hasn’t been charged yet, that would be a good first step.

    • potpie@beehaw.org
      3·
      11 months ago

      Woah there chief! Lemme tell everyone a little story…

      Back when I was on Reddit, I followed any and all Trump news (and especially Jan 6 investigation news) on an unhealthily regular basis. These kinds of Eeyore comments were extremely common and usually voted up to pepper through the top ⅓ of all the ‘best’ comments. It got so bad that some subreddits explicitly banned them, though it didn’t really end the practice.

      Then Russia invaded Ukraine. All the disparaging comments ceased immediately. The frequency absolutely fell off a cliff, because all those comments were being served up to us by Russian bots. Russia wants nothing more than to further destabilize the US as well as any other democratic institution.

      I’m not saying this comment right here is a Russian bot, but it’s definitely doing a Russian bot’s job by trying to undermine any confidence we might have in the concepts of justice or democracy.