1118
submitted 2 years ago by girlfreddy@lemmy.ca to c/news@lemmy.world

Oliver made the proposal on Sunday’s episode of his HBO show Last Week Tonight, saying the supreme court justice had 30 days to accept or it would expire.

The British-born comedian’s offer came after a steady drumbeat of media investigations in the previous several months established that Thomas failed to disclose that political benefactors bought him lavish vacation travel and real estate for his mother. Thomas also failed to disclose – as required – that he allowed school fees for a family member to be paid off and had been provided a loan to buy a luxury motor coach, all after openly complaining about the need to raise supreme court justices’ salaries.

As a result, Thomas’s impartiality came into question after he sided with the contentious ruling that eliminated the federal abortion rights once provided by the Roe v Wade case.

He also recently listened to arguments over whether Donald Trump can be removed from states’ ballots in the presidential election after the former president’s supporters – whom he told to “fight like hell” – staged the January 6 attack at the US Capitol in Washington DC. Thomas resisted pressure to recuse himself from such matters, even though his wife, Ginni Thomas, is a conservative political activist who has endorsed false claims from Trump and his supporters that the 2020 election he lost to Joe Biden was stolen from him.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 296 points 2 years ago

Associate Supreme Court Justice annual salary: $285,400

So if he turns it down, he either really likes being a judge (he doesn't act like it) or he's got a financial incentive beyond his salary to stay.

And I'm guessing he'll turn it down.

[-] Atom@lemmy.world 115 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

We're stuck with him till 2034 at least, he had this to say following his confirmation:

"The liberals made my life miserable for 43 years," a former clerk renmembered Thomas who was 43 years old when confirmed saying, according to The New York Times. "And I'm going to make their lives miserable for 43 years."

https://www.businessinsider.com/clarence-thomas-told-clerks-he-wants-to-make-liberals-miserable-2022-6?amp

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 101 points 2 years ago

Yes, but he also lies all the time, so I wouldn't exactly take than on face value.

[-] Crikeste@lemm.ee 62 points 2 years ago

I wonder what ways he thinks liberals made his life miserable. Honestly sounds like this idiot doesn’t even know what the word ‘liberal’ means.

[-] someguy3@lemmy.ca 38 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

He didn't like people thinking he got into law school etc because he was black. He fervently hates affirmative action.

[-] SnotFlickerman 48 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

He hates it because he's literally one of the people whom affirmative action helped put him in a position he is totally unqualified for (Supreme Court Justice).

His evidence that it is bad and doesn't work is... himself.

What was that thing about conservatives and projection.... Oh yeah: "It's always projection."

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 55 points 2 years ago

I dunno. Oliver has guaranteed him a cool $1mil per year, until either Thomas or John dies (out of his own pocket no less!!), AND thrown in a brand new, top of the line Prevost Marathon motor coach.

It's a mouth-watering deal.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 47 points 2 years ago

Third option: he turns it down because he likes STIGGINIT too much.

What's funny is, NPR did an interview with a guy who wrote a book on Thomas, and one of the things he points out is how much Thomas hates affirmative action because of a deep-seated insecurity about his own accomplishments.

Which becomes the ultimate irony: the only reason Thomas is on SCOTUS is because Republicans wanted a black man to replace Thurgood Marshall, but without all the pesky "morals" and "ethics." In other words, he obtained the pinnacle of his career... Because of his skin color.

No wonder he hates himself.

[-] Nastybutler@lemmy.world 15 points 2 years ago

I truly believe Uncle Ruckus from The Boondocks is the best portrayal of Thomas anyone has done.

[-] invertedspear@lemm.ee 42 points 2 years ago

Even if he decided it was a good deal, if he cares about the legacy of his past decisions at least seeming legitimate, he has to turn it down. We all know he’s for sale, but he loses deniability if he straight up sells out.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago

if he was concerned with anything he's done seeming legitimate, He probably wouldnt have taken all the bribes and shit that we know of thus far.

load more comments (9 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] PrincessLeiasCat@sh.itjust.works 116 points 2 years ago

We don’t deserve John Oliver. He is too good and pure.

[-] A_Random_Idiot@lemmy.world 23 points 2 years ago

I'm convinced that Stewart retired cause Oliver stole the source of his power when he left TDS to go to HBO.

[-] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 19 points 2 years ago

I’d agree but. Stewart had a much harder job multiple days of the week imo. Oliver gets a week to really write gold. So Stewart still goated imo. Or his writing team was lol

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[-] lennybird@lemmy.world 81 points 2 years ago

I'm just annoyed HBOMax is now delaying pushing John Oliver's segments to YouTube but I guess it was inevitable...

[-] Pratai@lemmy.cafe 17 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Fuck YouTube. Who cares? That platform needs to go. Hopefully more people do this.

EDIT: I wonder how many of the people giving me all these the pointless down arrows are the same ones that complain every time a news article shows how shitty YouTube is to its patrons.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 22 points 2 years ago

What's the alternative that actually has content?

load more comments (14 replies)
[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 12 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

pushing to YouTube is better than not pushing to YouTube.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] garretble@lemmy.world 79 points 2 years ago

I’m stealing this joke from someone I saw on bluesky or Masto (I forget), but:

Why would he take a pay cut?

[-] reddig33@lemmy.world 55 points 2 years ago

I’ll be surprised if he doesn’t take it.

  • It’s likely a bigger bribe than he’s already getting.
  • He’s old and probably tired of working.
  • it’s an election season and republicans will just stall any new appointments to replace him until after the election.
[-] plz1@lemmy.world 31 points 2 years ago

Republicans are not in charge of the Senate.

[-] AlwaysNowNeverNotMe@kbin.social 26 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

The Democrats will pretend their hands are tied and beg maga to allow them to seat someone.

[-] aStonedSanta@lemm.ee 13 points 2 years ago

Dunno why the down votes. It’s sadly true. They won’t fight as hard as the republicans did to get where we are. And that’s why we are here.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Zuberi@lemmy.dbzer0.com 12 points 2 years ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] joenforcer@midwest.social 11 points 2 years ago

Are you joking?

load more comments (5 replies)
[-] ganksy@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago

The hero we want and need. Bless you John Oliver!

[-] KursoryGlance@lemmy.world 53 points 2 years ago

Thomas is just going to use this to negotiate better pay from his existing benefactors...

[-] Xavier@lemmy.ca 22 points 2 years ago

That is fine too. Better be more expensive for them.

However, I'm rather inclined to suspect that they have enough "blackmail" over the course of his life's proclivity (including some before he even became a judge) hence money is probably not going to sway him that much.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Vlarbgersplah@lemmy.ml 45 points 2 years ago

Even if this did top his current bribes, I can't seem him walking away from the power.

[-] SloppyPuppy@lemmy.world 42 points 2 years ago

Just fundraise like 100 mil to get trump out of the race. Totally worth it and hes gonna take it with both hands.

[-] MisterD@lemmy.ca 56 points 2 years ago

He'd take the money and stay in the race

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 14 points 2 years ago

Yeah. He'd just fight the suit in court for years. And then when ordered to repay her could and have lived off they interest if they didn't somehow seize it into escrow.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[-] some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org 34 points 2 years ago

I didn't realize the show was back. Outstanding work. The Trump-packed courts are the reason I don't think the USA can be fixed during my lifetime and will only get worse.

[-] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 years ago

Trump had nothing to do with Clarance Thomas, he's been in since the 90s

[-] girlfreddy@lemmy.ca 26 points 2 years ago

Trump put 3 of his own on it tho.

[-] StrawberryPigtails@lemmy.sdf.org 26 points 2 years ago

I saw this last night! ROFL! John Oliver kept asking how it was legal for him to make the offer! lol. I kinda hope Justice Thomas takes the offer.

[-] Neato@ttrpg.network 11 points 2 years ago

Contracts can do pretty much anything legal. This is offering money to not work and penalties for this round be repayment. So there isn't a lot of risk involved at long as someone doesn't try to screw to receiver through bad contractual language.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 16 points 2 years ago

Cool, but the Republicans would just block any appointments until after the election, like they did with Garland.

[-] HighElfMage@lemmy.world 14 points 2 years ago

Only the Senate gets to block appointments like that, and Democrats control the Senate.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 Feb 2024
1118 points (100.0% liked)

News

36233 readers
2199 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. 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. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS