I’m no accountant or tax professional so maybe someone can help me understand what possible advantage he could be getting from possibly disclosing more income than he’s really getting?
Does he really own the rental property? The article doesn’t say.
I’m not a fan of this guy but this article seems to leave out a lot of important details.
>Thomas has reported income from a firm called Ginger, Ltd., Partnership over the last two decades, but in 2006 it was shut down and replaced by a new firm, the report said. The new firm, Ginger Holdings, LLC, is similarly named, but there is no mention of it in Thomas’ records.
Look, I loathe Clarence Thomas as much as anyone. But this sounds like a nothingburger. They slightly renamed the firm, but Thomas continued using the old name on his disclosure reports. Making a big stink about this will just make people think the other issues with Clarence Thomas aren’t a serious issue either.
“The committee announced in the letter that it would hold a hearing “in the coming days” on “**the need to restore confidence in the Supreme Court’s ethical standards**.””
Impossible until this sexual predator and tax scofflaw, his blackout drunk rapist buddy and the religious fanatics are removed.
I want him gone as much as anyone, but what a misleading headline. The real estate firm changed names in 2006, but apparently still exists and they acknowledge in the article it may basically just be a paperwork error. You can tell from these comments how many people didn’t even bother to read the story.
Lemon_LostSock says
It’s almost like he felt he was above the law…
Still_too_soon says
I’m shocked that this sexual assaulting pervert ended up being somewhat corrupt when given total power.
TypicalEngineer123 says
I’m no accountant or tax professional so maybe someone can help me understand what possible advantage he could be getting from possibly disclosing more income than he’s really getting?
Does he really own the rental property? The article doesn’t say.
I’m not a fan of this guy but this article seems to leave out a lot of important details.
TAU_equals_2PI says
>Thomas has reported income from a firm called Ginger, Ltd., Partnership over the last two decades, but in 2006 it was shut down and replaced by a new firm, the report said. The new firm, Ginger Holdings, LLC, is similarly named, but there is no mention of it in Thomas’ records.
Look, I loathe Clarence Thomas as much as anyone. But this sounds like a nothingburger. They slightly renamed the firm, but Thomas continued using the old name on his disclosure reports. Making a big stink about this will just make people think the other issues with Clarence Thomas aren’t a serious issue either.
johnlier says
You mean money laundering
UghKakis says
I’m all for getting this guy out but can we start examining all the justices?
keninsd says
“The committee announced in the letter that it would hold a hearing “in the coming days” on “**the need to restore confidence in the Supreme Court’s ethical standards**.””
Impossible until this sexual predator and tax scofflaw, his blackout drunk rapist buddy and the religious fanatics are removed.
contactspring says
So where’d the money come from?
rpapafox says
> In recent years, Thomas reportedly continued to disclose between $50,000 and $100,000 in income from the old firm annually.
The headline minimizes it. It is literally tens of thousands.
savebox says
I want him gone as much as anyone, but what a misleading headline. The real estate firm changed names in 2006, but apparently still exists and they acknowledge in the article it may basically just be a paperwork error. You can tell from these comments how many people didn’t even bother to read the story.
l397flake says
Just because he is a judge, he is not entitled to take all deductions available to him.
AdkRaine12 says
So, like Harlan giving Ginnie’s organization big bucks ***isn’t*** paying her salary? Ole Clarence needed an alternative revenue stream, too.