đ¨đ¨đ¨SCOOP: New whistleblower docs show Jane Roberts, who is married to SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts, made $10.3 million placing lawyers at elite firms â https://t.co/uB82RgJ8YC
— Mattathias Schwartz (@Schwartzesque) April 28, 2023
I think this completes the bingo sheet on the SC(R)OTUS Justices. Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Coney Barrett — there’s not a one of them hasn’t befouled their position on the bench, is there?
There’s nothing wrong with a Justice’s spouse having their own career, comes the swift defense. Choosing to look away from blatant conflicts of interest, choosing not to recuse oneself from related cases, however…
Click on the story to see the line-item spreadsheet of her commissions.
At least one of the firms that paid Jane Roberts â WilmerHale â later argued before SCOTUS. John Roberts did not recuse, and voted in favor of WHâs client.
— Mattathias Schwartz (@Schwartzesque) April 28, 2023
IIRC, this would be about the time their twins started primary school, so Jane would have more time free…
Two years after John Roberts’ confirmation as the Supreme Court’s chief justice in 2005, his wife, Jane Sullivan Roberts, made a pivot. After a long and distinguished career as a lawyer, she refashioned herself as a legal recruiter, a matchmaker who pairs job-hunting lawyers up with corporations and firms.
Roberts told a friend that the change was motivated by a desire to avoid the appearance of conflicts of interest, given that her husband was now the highest-ranking judge in the country. “There are many paths to the good life,” she said. “There are so many things to do if you’re open to change and opportunity.”
And life was indeed good for the Robertses, at least for the years 2007 to 2014. During that eight-year stretch, according to internal records from her employer, Jane Roberts generated a whopping $10.3 million in commissions, paid out by corporations and law firms for placing high-dollar lawyers with them.
That eye-popping figure comes from records in a whistleblower complaint filed by a disgruntled former colleague of Roberts, who says that as the spouse of the most powerful judge in the United States, the income she earns from law firms who practice before the Court should be subject to public scrutiny.
“When I found out that the spouse of the chief justice was soliciting business from law firms, I knew immediately that it was wrong,” the whistleblower, Kendal B. Price, who worked alongside Jane Roberts at the legal recruiting firm Major, Lindsey & Africa, told Insider in an interview. “During the time I was there, I was discouraged from ever raising the issue. And I realized that even the law firms who were Jane’s clients had nowhere to go. They were being asked by the spouse of the chief justice for business worth hundreds of thousands of dollars, and there was no one to complain to. Most of these firms were likely appearing or seeking to appear before the Supreme Court. It’s natural that they’d do anything they felt was necessary to be competitive.”
Roberts’ apparent $10.3 million in compensation puts her toward the top of the payscale for legal headhunters. Price’s disclosures, which were filed under federal whistleblower-protection laws and are now in the hands of the House and Senate Judiciary committees, add to the mounting questions about how Supreme Court justices and their families financially benefit from their special status, an area that Senate Democrats are vowing to investigate after a series of disclosure lapses by the justices themselves…
I guess it’s like the Mafia, or Putin’s Russia: Nobody gets to be a member until the blackmail material is in the company files.
anon
Play hardball, withhold their budget
Baud
FelonyGovt
In my career as an arbitrator, I need to disclose every actual and potential conflict of interest for every case. Whether I have had a previous proceeding with any of the parties, their attorneys, etc. Â Is there anything that might present even the appearance of a conflict of interest, such as something my spouse or child is involved in. It boggles my mind that this just doesn’t seem to apply to the Supreme Court justices.
Oh, I forgot, they signed a statement assuring us that they are ethical! Never mind!
Lapassionara
They have no shame. Justice Roberts will be known as the Chief Justice of the most ethically-challenged Supreme Court in history.
CaseyL
@Lapassionara:
They have no shame because they have no concept of public service whatsoever. It’s all a grift, all the way down.
A philosophy they share with the rest of the GOP.
gVOR08
10.3 mil over 8 years. In 2014 the Chief Justice’s salary was $255,500, so roughly 2 mil over 8 years. That might rival Ginni Thomas’ ability to monetize her husbands seat.
cain
When they say ‘activist judges’ – it is always a confession. In this case, they are quite active in leveraging their position to enrich themselves and create conflicts of interest.
Bruce K in ATH-GR
We need to add six justices to the Supreme Court, because right now, there are only three actual Justices: Justice Kagan, Justice Sotomayor, and Justice Jackson.
TheOtherHank
I realize that Coney-Barret is a horrible person. But what has she done that’s comparable to the other 5?
Also, I’m still waiting to find out who paid off Kavanaugh’s debts.
Scout211
I think this story has been out there before. But I like that they all are being forced to endure some recent sunlight on their financial dealings, thanks to Clarence and Ginnyâs recent exposure.
But Alitoâs current statement is, well, equally infuriating. He clearly believes the court must be completely insulated and protected.  But if his rulings hurt citizens, well they must endure.
Target of assassins? Really, Sam?
. . .
. . .
Baud
@Scout211:
It’s actually common for people accused of rape to blame the Clintons.
Scout211
@TheOtherHank: Hereâs one example:
Amy Coney Barrett took speaking fees from a group that pushed Mississippi’s abortion ban. A constitutional law expert says that won’t stop her ruling on the case.
Eolirin
@Scout211: Yeah, it’s especially beyond the pale for anyone to call you a rapist when you actually are a rapist.
NotMax
Gonna have to vigorously scrub what the spouse’s name is from memory so as not to sully The Oops Girl whenever I listen to a favorite cast album.
;)
JPL
@Scout211: What a fking idiot.  As we know from past leaks, he or his wife was responsible for the Hobby Lobby decision.  fking asshole
Sorry about my language but the news is covering this as though he is a good source. fkfkfkffkf
TheOtherHank
@Scout211:Â â
Thanks, I had forgotten about that one. They’re all corrupt to the bone. Fuck ’em
geg6
These people are disgusting and beneath contempt. Â Maybe we revisit Marbury v Madison and ignore their asses. Â Or even better, add justices, which has been done many times over US history.
C Stars
And that dress makes her look like some kind of deep water tube worm. Bad judgment all around!
kalakal
And to add to the unedifying spectacle that is SCOTUS it seems Rapey McBeerface may be getting his time in the floodlights (again)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/apr/28/brett-kavanaugh-investigation-omissions-senate-sexual-assault-claims
eclare
@C Stars:Â Â That description of the dress is perfect!
Ishiyama
Will one of you lawyer types explain what has happened to good old 18 USC sec. 1001? And why it doesn’t apply to stuff signed by Supreme Court Justices, or nominees therefor?
Birdie
The thing that makes this worse is that both Jane and John Roberts see all that money flowing in and attribute it 100% to her talent, hard work and adaptability. As if every solicitation she made to law firms, she faced the same odds as any other recruiter.
The self-congratulation embedded in the “just be open to change and opportunity” line is what gets me. It’s why rich people are so unsympathetic to poor people – this false belief that their success is entirely meritocratic. And they are so dominant in cultural discourse that we are mostly inured to the influence peddling – her new line of business has been public knowledge for years.
One other thing, I’m curious about the profiles of the lawyers she placed. I wonder who she and the CJ (by name association) ended up helping.
SpaceUnit
They should just go ahead and post their prices on the SCOTUS website.
geg6
@Birdie:
That line struck me, too. Â Jesus, the clueless self-congratulation on display.
Birdie
@geg6: You just know she says that to junior staff at her recruiting firm and thinks she’s a “mentor”. Ugh.
Ascap_scab
When -all- nine sign a letter telling a co-equal branch of Government to sit and spin, all fucking nine are dirty.
Time to expand the court to 13, assert 20 year term limits.
Ksmiami
@C Stars: Iâm always amazed at how cheaply these people can be bought⌠literally for chump change
MazeDancer
Wonder why the Chief was so loathe to consider some SCOTUS ethics reform….
On another note, Amazon Prime’s The Citadel is wooden. Even Stanley Tucci can’t save it.
OverTwistWillie
@SpaceUnit:
Twenty dollars, same as downtown.
SpaceUnit
@OverTwistWillie:
And I thought prostitution was only legal in Nevada.
OverTwistWillie
@MazeDancer:
Up to his eyeballs. He was the only one to understand blowing up Roe would ice the grift.
Call it enlightened self-interest.
Ksmiami
@SpaceUnit: but will they offer group discounts?- âfor the mere sum of 200,000, you can get not one but two justices to write convoluted blather to side with your company- going once going twice- act fast or the near defunct oil guys will take your opportunity!âŚâ
Kay
@Birdie:
Agree Birdie- every word.
NotMax
OT.
Caught between a rock and a hard place.
SpaceUnit
They should put swinging doors on the court building and get a guy playing ragtime on the piano.
Steeplejack
@Scout211:
Also, no smoke or fire yet, but worth monitoring: Coney-Barrett’s husband opened a law practice in D.C.âclient list undisclosed. đ¤
Roger Moore
@Ksmiami:
$10 million isn’t chump change. It’s an amount of money that would be life changing to at least 99% of the country. We’ve just allowed the ultra-rich to accumulate absurd amounts of money.
Kay
@Scout211:
The Right wingers on the bench want lawyers who are bowing and scraping ass kissers- it’s why they start screeching about how students are infringing on their speech every time they go to a college.
Why does Justice Alito need so much defending, anyway? Maybe he and his far Right colleagues on the federal bench could try behaving better? It’s not my job to launder his reputation. I comply with all reporting rules.
Roger Moore
@NotMax:Â â
My sympathy is limited. They should either A) rescind his invitation or B) arrest him when he shows up.
mrmoshpotato
@anon: Fuck ’em! Slap them all with a salmon!
And go Cubs!
Chief Oshkosh
Ya know, shit like this it what got heads cut off in the late 1700s. We STUPIDLY have a system that allows for no real-world recourse in dealing with these shits.
I’m sure Depittee Dawg Durbin will get right on this!
Jeffro
THIS
I’m ok if they add 4 to bring it up to 13 (the number of circuits, right?).
But this shit is ridiculous.
FSM willing, we win big in ’24 and go for broke post-Inauguration: expand the Court, expand the House, all of it!
Kay
The rest of them should start making public statements and perhaps make an effort not to sound put-upon, aggrieved and entitled.
They really really don’t want Alito as the voice and face of that court and he talks (complains) 4x as much as the rest of them put together- so he is the voice and face. I suggest they find another spokesperson.
WaterGirl
@Roger Moore: Yes. Â It’s really quite simple.
Jeffro
They joke about it in the billionaires’ club, on their private jets and on their yachts.
“CHUMP CHANGE, Harlan! Â You got him for chump change! Â Although in fairness, I bought my Justice too…”
Steeplejack
More genius strategery from DeSantis:
karen marie
@Bruce K in ATH-GR:  I’m wondering about those three as well. They ALL signed Roberts’ “Fuck You” missive.
mrmoshpotato
@NotMax: Bush, Cheney, and Condi Rice should attend too so their war criminal bitchasses can get arrested too.
Kay
@Jeffro:
Roberts says they can’t do recusals because there aren’t enough of them and they can’t slot in other federal judges. Which got me thinking. What about 9 who rotate with 4 acting as alternates in case someone has a conflict?
karen marie
@Steeplejack: Because of course he did!
We live in the stupidest of times.
Citizen Alan
@Roger Moore: Is more than life changing. For the vast majority of americans, acquiring $10m would result in generational wealth.
Old School
That’s a nice commission rate.
MomSense
This is why job number one for all Democratic voters is to ALWAYS vote for the Supreme Court. Â All the other arguments are just self absorbed nonsense. Â Would be cute if it werenât so fucking consequential.
The courts are always on the ballot.
Ksmiami
@Roger Moore: on a relative value basis⌠it is.
Roger Moore
@WaterGirl:
Realistically, though, there is a third solution, which is to admit you have no respect for the ICC and will let Putin hang out in your country with no consequences. The problem is they really want to try option #3, but they’re afraid of the criticism that will come with the decision. So they’re trying to come up with a clever 4th solution that doesn’t have the downside of any of the other possibilities.
Jeffro
@Kay: he said they “can’t do recusals”? Â So they just have no choice but to keep cashing checks and ruling in favor of their benefactors and ‘oh well’?
How about we bump SCOTUS up to 13 and rotate other federal judges through there on a regular (non-election-cycle) basis, just to ensure none of them feel Alito-level entitled to their fiefdom?
I’ll sign on to most anything other than ‘oh well’ from these clowns. Â See also, gun safety, reproductive rights, gerrymandering, etc. Â No more ‘oh well, what can you do?’
Ksmiami
@Jeffro: completelyâŚ
Jeffro
My heirs and their heirs and then THEIR heirs would be like, “Thanks, Uncle Fro!” Â (As a condition of receiving even one dime, LOL.)
Give me a few generations after that and we’d
rule the galaxyhave at least a few nice homes in the nicest places!$9M in the bank into perpetuity would keep an awful lot of Fros in beer and Skittles. Â Sorry about that other $1M folks but that’s just commission costs for getting the Fro
Intergalactic Empirelaughably basic trust fund started.Kay
@Jeffro:
Kay
@Jeffro:
Well, no. He said the SCOTUS has issues with recusals that are unique to SCOTUS. I agree!
So let’s add 4. They can sit with 9 or 11 and have either 2 or 4 as alternates. I think the whole set should rotate, so 9 of 13 or 11 of 13 for each case. It serves another of my aims, which is reminding them they are not, actually, irreplaceable (except to their loved ones of course).
smith
Has there ever been a Supreme Court this blatantly politicized and corrupt, and so arrogant about it? I’m thinking history will remember the Roberts court as the Dirty Court.
japa21
@Kay:
So I assume he would agree to put off hearing any cases if there is a vacancy on the court due to illness or death. What he is saying is that they need, require, must have, all 9 justices present to hear every case. Which, based on history, is not true.
Bex
Wasn’t there some controversy about the Roberts’s adoption of Irish children? Ireland is pretty strict about children being adopted overseas (for good reason) and there has to be another country “involved” in some way to make it “legal.” Asking for a friend…
Roger Moore
@Kay:Â â
He’s telling on himself. The Supreme Court does recusals often enough that we know it’s possible and won’t result in the end of the world. When he says they can’t do recusals, he means that they’d rarely be at full strength if they recused themselves every time they ought to. More importantly, he knows it would severely hurt both the conservative majority and the appearance that the Court is impartial if we saw just how often they’re taking money.
Jeffro
@Kay: I think we’re just a few justices and a few tweaks to the rotation/recusal scheme apart here, honestly.
Whatever defangs this anti-majority, anti-democratic, anti-rule-of-law unelected council and puts them in their proper place in our system is fine by me. Â Add 4, add 6…rotate a few, rotate them all…just no more of this corrupt combination of payoffs, privilege, and insistence that no one question them, ever, that they have going now.
Jeffro
this
“We’ve worked long and hard to get this kind of majority (as well as line our own pockets)…we’re not going to revert to some sense of fairness and good government NOW”
kalakal
@Kay:
I think I see the hole in hisÂ
whininglogicSteeplejack
@Bex:
Yes, it is a widespread rumor/meme in the “adoption community” that Roberts somehow laundered his lily-white Irish children through a country in South America to get around the laws. I’m not up on the details, but my brother encountered the story numerous times when he was going through the adoption process with his son and daughter.
Goku (aka Amerikan Baka)
I wonder what the Supreme Court Police think of this shit. They swear an oath to the Constitution and this is who they’re supposed to protect? The people who are not only shitting on that document but are also flagrantly corrupt too?
Jay
@Roger Moore:
the US is their #2 trading partner after China. The are well aware that #3 will result in sanctions from a bunch of countries.
Kay
@kalakal:
They inherited, unearned, the institutional reputation of that court. They blew through it like spoiled rich kids, spending every bit of trust and legitimacy they were handed.
It’s much much harder to get it back once it’s gone.
eclare
@Steeplejack:Â Â Hahaha….
eclare
@Steeplejack:Â Â Hahaha….
sdhays
Right. Because taking money from a single law firm generates so many more conflicts than taking money from a bunch of them.
Mike in NC
Our federal government is polluted by corrupt Republican hacks, both Congress and the Supreme (Extreme) Court.
Jay
@Steeplejack:
Kay
@Roger Moore:
The part that blows me away is how they keep making this OUR PROBLEM. It’s not the publics job to figure out how to run that court properly and ethically. It’s THEIR JOB. In fact, they INSIST that they, and only they, can in any way manage this court. So manage it! Clean it up! Report properly. Recuse when its called for. Stop attending GOP political events. Stop screaming and crying at confirmation hearings. Grow up.
JPL
@Jay: That always seemed odd to me. How do you adopt blond haired, blue eyed children in Mexico. Why not just adopt?
David đ âThe Establishmentâđ Koch
If Raven is here, “Woodstock” is running on TCM
JoyceH
I was unaware that Roberts had adopted children and there was controversy about it – can someone give me a recap or perhaps some links?
Baud
She should have learned to code.
Steeplejack
@JoyceH:
Wikipedia:
Baud
@Kay:
“I would like to say to my critics, it’s your fault I’m being criticized.”
Gin & Tonic
@Baud: I may be an outlier, but my path to the good life involves a loving spouse and happy children.
Baud
@Gin & Tonic:
That doesn’t sound lucrative at all.
Gin & Tonic
@Roger Moore: I could have sworn theyâve already moved to withdraw from the ICC.
ColoradoGuy
From Driftglass:
“It’s a club, and you’re not in it.”
Sure Lurkalot
Nothing to see hereâŚjust levels of corruption and self-dealing by members of the highest court in the land that if committed by you or me would put us in serious jeopardy. And their arrogant protestations are really too fucking much.
Iâm sorry the three D justices signed that ridiculous letter. They have diminished themselves IMHO.
Ksmiami
@Kay: hence my motto- âburn it to the fucking ground and start overâŚâ
Another Scott
Speaking of court, ICYMI…
Cheers,
Scott.
japa21
@Another Scott:Â â
Takes a lot of time to come up with different ways to say “I can’t remember.”
mrmoshpotato
@japa21: Alberto Gonzalez has a masterclass on it.
Sanjeevs
@Another Scott: Iâll believe it when I see it.
Not a single fake elector has been charged. Nine if the Congressmen who participated, none of the officials who deliberately left the Capitol in defended etc etc
With Trump there is some excuse. Heâs a career criminal who never uses email and always gives ambiguous orders for criminal acts.
But the rest of the plotters organized a coup in the space of a few weeks. That could only be done via electronic communication, Â They arenât being charged because, as Schiff said, the DoJ didnât want to.
Another Scott
@Sure Lurkalot:
Let me tell you about the GQP SCOTUS justices. They are different from you and me. They possess and enjoy early, and it does something to them, makes them soft where we are hard, and cynical where we are trustful, in a way that, unless you were born rich, it is very difficult to understand. They think, deep in their hearts, that they are better than we are because we had to discover the compensations and refuges of life for ourselves. Even when they enter deep into our world or sink below us, they still think that they are better than we are. They are different.
Without the people forcing a change, they’re not going to change for the better.
Grr…,
Scott.
Sanjeevs
@Another Scott: Iâll believe it when I see it.
Not a single fake elector has been charged. None  if the Congressmen who participated, none of the officials who deliberately left the Capitol in defended etc etc
With Trump there is some excuse. Heâs a career criminal who never uses email and always gives ambiguous orders for criminal acts.
But the rest of the plotters organized a coup in the space of a few weeks. That could only be done via electronic communication, Â They arenât being charged because, as Schiff said, the DoJ didnât want to.
Mr. Bemused Senior
@japa21:Â it’s Friday, and music seems to be in the air,
soo….
Kay
@Baud:
Baud
@Kay:
I, on the other hand, have you guys.
Ksmiami
@Kay: Oh FFS⌠what a bs insular world view. One thingâs for sure, none of these Supreme Court hacks and their wives would be any fun at parties.
Dangerman
So, like a Massage Parlor?
ETA: She’s a headhunter, right?
Anne Laurie
IIRC, two different pregnant Irish women just happened to be vacationing in a Central American country with much laxer international adoption laws when they gave birth. And the Roberts just happened to be looking for a newborn boy and a newborn girl with Irish ancestry — voila!
Did the Roberts just happen to have connections with Irish professional adoption agencies known for a predilection towards ‘good (heterosexual) Catholic couples’ who might not personally be living in the Olde Sod? What, are you prejudiced against religious people, now? Don’t you want those poor adorable little blond innocents to go to prosperous loving homes where they can have the best of everything?…
Nobody with credibility wants to damage those kids (who are now young adults) by digging around too publicly. But it sure did seem like an early warning indicator that the adult Robertses, both John and Jane, believed that the rules didn’t apply to them.
Sure Lurkalot
@Baud:
Lucky you and lucky us.
Kay
It’s 12 pages (pdf) but it’s well worth a read.
Another Scott
Yup.
He’s a monster.
Cheers,
Scott.
Bill Arnold
@Sure Lurkalot:
I would not be surprised to hear reports in the future that they have written their own, stronger, letter, and are circulating it for signatures. That would be an interesting twist.
Kay
But even if they could afford to hire one of these small number of lawyers (they can’t- but say they could) the lawyers won’t do work that goes against the interests of their corporate clients.
So no fair hearing for you. =]
Bill Arnold
@Another Scott:
Interesting. I’d seen what looked like a reliable report that he had been in the build for 7 hours, but the report that he actually testified for nearly all that time would mean, if true, that he answered a lot of questions.
SiubhanDuinne
@David đ âThe Establishmentâđ Koch:
What if he isnât here? Is it still running?
:-)
Bill Arnold
@Sanjeevs:
Do you have any evidence that that is true, except perhaps in the weak interpretation that there wasn’t enough to charge them with that had a significantly greater than zero chance of conviction at a trial?
Oh. To be clear; there are forms of electronic communication, e.g. encrypted messengers, that are actually as far as is publicly known secure unless one or more of the endpoints are seized and subsequently compromised (which is possible in most cases).
Baud
@Kay:
You should do it!
satby
@Sure Lurkalot: @Baud: I was going to offer my condolencesÂ
NotMax
@Sure Lurkalot
I can’t begrudge them signing. Refusing to put their names to a commitment to ethical principles (even if in this case ostensibly, and unenforceable) would have generated a mammoth firestorm of finger pointing misinterpretation and shifted the spotlight from reported transgressions to focus on them.
Omnes Omnibus
@Bill Arnold: Of course not, but it’s manifestly true because they feel it in their bones. In.Their.Bones!
Bill Arnold
@Sanjeevs:
That would be nice. (If it happens, which I consider likely.)Â I expect goalpost moving from many others, though, in that event.
Baud
@Omnes Omnibus:
I feel that way sometimes when the rain’s a’coming.
NotMax
@Omnes Omnibus
Which reminds one that commenter dances around in your bones has not been seen here for a distressingly long while.
BlueGuitarist
also in âon what planet do they spend most of their time?â
Minnesota a R state senator:
âtwo ounces is equivalent to three jointsâ
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1652045992030511108
Baud
@NotMax:
Oh, she’s been missing for years. I miss her.
Kay
He goes on to exonerate all the conservatives and all but announce it was a liberal. So much for “levels of proof”.
Baud
@Kay:
I also have a good idea who’s responsible. Based on the venerable legal doctrine of “he who smelt it, dealt it.”
BlueGuitarist
@Baud:
also, too, âevery accusation is a confessionâ
Dirk Reinecke
@NotMax: Both the rock and the hard place has been manufactured by the African National Congress for itself.
The ANC counts as its friends the worst governments in the world, yet at the same time lectures the “West”. South Africa does little to no trade with Russia, and the majority of its trade with the EU and the US. So why is the ANC so friendly to Russia? Corruption.
Corruption has essentially crippled the ability of the state to do anything. E.g. the former Deputy President of South Africa, David Mabuza often went to Russia for undisclosed medical treatements. The ANC makes the GOP look like toddlers when it comes to venality.
For those who want to know abit more about what is going on down here I would recommend the Daily Maverick.
https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2023-04-27-a-confederacy-of-dunces-ramaphosa-is-drowning-in-a-sea-of-morbid-symptoms/
Kay
@Baud:
I think all the Righties dislike Sotomayor and blame everything on her.
Baud
@Kay:
That speaks well of her.
Dirk Reinecke
@Gin & Tonic: They did attempt it, when a similiar case happened in 2015 when the then president of Sudan al-Bashir on a similiar warrant from the ICC.
The case went up all the way to our highest court, the Constitutional Court which ordered the government to arrest him.
Then the government pretended to be even more incompetent than usual and let him slip out of the country while “looking for him”
They then let the matter for the legislation to withdraw from the ICC lie unresolved in parliament until earlier this year when they withdrew it.
The incompetence of the ANC government is hard to even invision. If they were vaguely competent they would have realised that something like this was coming the moment the ICC warrant was issued and then taken steps to avoid it.
Here is an article about the original issue
https://issafrica.org/iss-today/the-real-problem-behind-south-africas-refusal-to-arrest-al-bashir
mrmoshpotato
I see the NFL draft decided to jerk it to that jingoistic shit from Lee Greenass. I must’ve missed the lesson on wars being fought so we could play sports. Fucking jagoffs.
Gin & Tonic
@Dirk Reinecke: Thank you.
Jackie
@Baud: Lucky you?đ
eclare
@mrmoshpotato:  I was watching the draft, UT had several players hoping to get picked, and that swill started playing. Excruciating.
I noticed tonight Goodell had service members on stage with him trying to avoid getting booed, Didn’t work.
eclare
@Baud:Â Â To quote Garth Brooks, I’ve got friends in low places.
Tony G
The Supreme Court cesspool. Â It’s long past time for the “liberal” members of the court to speak out, loudly, against this blatant corruption. Â I won’t hold my breath though. Â They’re like the “good cops” who look the other way when they’re brutal and corrupt colleagues break the law.
Jeffro
OT but I think I have seen a couple of tweets and tweet-respun media appearances from Ric Grenell today, and it brings to mind that it’s not just trumpov…a lot of folks in his orbit want back the Power And Grift Train along with trumpov.
The infighting should get nasty and I’m rooting for something more than injuries here.
Ronny Jackson alone should be good for an assault and battery charge against some poor DeSantis flunky
Scout211
A bit of good news for your evening:
US Army renames Fort Lee after two pioneering black officers.
Omnes Omnibus
@Tony G: Nope, I am not going to blame the liberal justices for the conservative justices’ corruption.
eclare
@Scout211:Â Â That is good news!
Timill
@mrmoshpotato: Traduisez en anglais pour les autres, svp. Ta muchly.
dave319
@Jeffro: Barrett, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh were all lawyers on Bush v. Gore. All you need to know about them is right there.
A woman from anywhere (formerly Mohagan)
@MazeDancer: Oh, too bad. Tucci is always wonderful. But yeah, it does sound very derivative, and if it is not done really well, who cares?
Another Scott
@Sanjeevs:
Patience, grasshopper.
From his Q&A thread tonight:
(Yes, it’s the fake Jack Smith. From his handle, I assume he’s a Harvard-trained lawyer.)
Cheers,
Scott.
Tony G
@Tony G: “their brutal and corrupt colleagues”. Â Damn autocorrect.
Jackie
@Scout211: That IS GOOD NEWS!
David đ âThe Establishmentâđ Koch
@Another Scott: Alternatively he/she may not be a lawyer but a guest at a Holiday Inn Express.
Another Scott
@Another Scott: Lots of good stuff in that thread.
Really??!
Hmm… Checks out. (Wikipedia says he was hit by a scooter while bicycling and suffered a leg fracture.)
Hard core. Good.
Cheers,
Scott.
Odie Hugh Manatee
So she changed careers and became one of the top earners in that career path? All on her lonesome, of course? Bullshit. She is clearly taking advantage of the situation and making bank while doing so. No wonder why Judge JR says that there’s nothing to see there.
All while wrecking our country in the name of their religion and party loyalty. I’m really pissed that the three liberal justices signed on to his bullshit letter.
Bupalos
Address her as “Mrs. Chief Justice.”
Address him as “Legal Headhunter’s Hubby “
Steeplejack
@SiubhanDuinne:
Director’s cut—four hours. Just ended a few minutes ago. I had it on in the background and got sucked into the last hour. Hendrix’s epic “Star-Spangled Banner” and then his beautiful coda.
Frankensteinbeck
@Kay:
Who got them their jobs, just as they got their jobs from successful friends. As they say, it’s a club, and you’re not in it.
NotMax
@Steeplejack
Jimi’s comments on that on the Cavett show.
Steeplejack
@Another Scott:
Bad link. Fixed: “I filed a motion . . .”
Steeplejack
@NotMax:
Thanks.
Chris T.
@Roger Moore:
That’s true, though you now need to hit about $20M to get into the “UHNW individual” category (UHNW = Ultra High Net Worth), so it’s only halfway to “elite status” as it were. And plenty of lottery winners blow it all even though “just” $1M can set you up pretty well.
I have a long way to go to hit UNHW myself đ
Hkedi [Kang T. Q.]
@Scout211: Well if you politically insulate from everything for your bad deeds….
Well that’s exactly how you get assassins…
Every accusation is a confession with these people.
Another Scott
@Steeplejack: Thanks. Sorry for the extra work.
Cheers,
Scott.
WaterGirl
@mrmoshpotato:
Would it be possible for you to translate that for me?
BellyCat
FTFY
Geminid
@WaterGirl: Probably referring to the NFL playing Lee Greenwood’s “Proud to be an American” at the big draft show
My late friend Chris was a country music fan, and he knew Greenwood as a third-tier country singer he heard while truck driving. When Greenwood showed up as a big “War on Terror” music star, I remember Chris commenting: “I wonder what rock they pulled him out from under.”
GibberJack
@Kay: I wonder how many of those lawyers got their jobs via Jane Roberts? Which is really via John Roberts.
The court is utterly partial and biased and working in collusion with some of the parties that come before it.
I wonder if the liberal justices do similar. How thoroughly compromised is this court?
The wealthiest buy what they want, be it legal rulings or white Irish babies. This is how they keep out the riff-raff from their club. Itâs a membership requirement. If you canât ignore the law, buy it or go around it, you arenât in the club.
GibberJack
@dave319: Did not know that.
Indeed it is.
crimson pimpernel
@Bupalos: And henceforth refer to the Roberts Court as “The Roberts Barons”