By SNN.BZ Staff
It should concern all American citizens that the Supreme Court of the United States has written its own code of conduct, which appears to sanction, if not “openly encourage” the continuation of practices that have smoothed the way to backroom deals and undue influence from corporations directly affected by the justices’ rulings.
The code of conduct was written by the justices themselves, which raises questions about its impartiality. It seems to be an endorsement for them to make as much money as they possible can while holding the most prestigious and legally powerful positions in the world. They observe no term limits and can serve until death. It actually explains how Justice Clarence Thomas‘s lifestyle became one of extreme luxury and how it was that Justice Sotomayor justified using her staff members and court clerks to use their time to sell her book.
As of January 2023, the salaries of the nine Supreme Court Justices are as follows:
- Chief Justice John Roberts: $298,500
- Associate Justice Clarence Thomas: $285,400
- Associate Justice Stephen Breyer: $285,400
- Associate Justice Samuel Alito: $285,400
- Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor: $285,400
- Associate Justice Elena Kagan: $285,400
- Associate Justice Neil Gorsuch: $285,400
- Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh: $285,400
- Associate Justice Amy Coney Barrett: $285,400
Their health care is provided free by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). It makes TRICARE look like a Welfare package for indigents.
Beneficiaries include themselves, their spouses, their unmarried children under 26 and of course any dependent offspring of any age if the person is mentally or physically incapacitated.
Additionally, they receive ’round the clock police protection from the United States Supreme Court Police on a 24-hour, 7 day per week basis. That protection is provided for themselves, their immediate spouses and relatives and their physical homes (for life). Their electricity and travel is provided for free.
It would have been far more appropriate for an independent entity to write the code of conduct that governs the Supreme Court justices rather than the very individuals who spend a great many ways to circumvent laws that restrict their ability “to earn.”
The current situation appears farcical and undermines the public’s confidence in the integrity of the Supreme Court. It is imperative that the Supreme Court take steps to address these concerns and restore the public’s trust in its ability to uphold the law.
With such a “comfortable and cozy” Code of Ethics for the supposed leaders of the country, it is easy to understand how the following historical events could have taken place. If anything, this list should serve as a reminder that when we do not recognize history, we are absolutely bound to repeat it.
Matthew Lyon (DR-VT): First Congressman to be recommended for censure after spitting on Roger Griswold (Federalist-Connecticut). The censure failed to pass. Separately, found guilty of violating Alien and Sedition Acts and sentenced to four months in jail, during which time he was re-elected (1798).
Charles F. Mitchell (R-NY): U.S. Representative from New York’s 33rd District was convicted of forgery, sentenced to one year in prison and fined, though he was paroled early due to poor health (1841).
Robert Smalls (R-SC): U.S. Representative from South Carolina was charged with accepting a $5,000 (equivalent to $137,406 in 2022) bribe during 1877 in relation to a government printing contract and found guilty. Smalls was pardoned in 1879 by South Carolina Governor William Simpson.
Joseph R. Burton (R-KS): Senator was convicted of accepting a $2,500 (equivalent to $81,426 in 2022) bribe (1904).
John Hipple Mitchell (R-OR): Senator was involved with the Oregon land fraud scandal, for which he was indicted and convicted while a sitting U.S. Senator (1905).
Henry B. Cassel (R-PA): Convicted of fraud related to the construction of the Pennsylvania State Capitol (1909).
William Lorimer (R-IL): Senator, The ‘blond boss of Chicago’ was found guilty of accepting bribes in 1912
Robert W. Archbald ®: Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, was convicted of corruption in 1912.
Albert Fall ®: Secretary of the Interior who was bribed by Harry F. Sinclair for control of the Teapot Dome federal oil reserves in Wyoming. He was the first U.S. cabinet member to ever be convicted; he served two years in prison (1922).
Andrew J. May (D-KY): Convicted of accepting bribes from a war munitions manufacturer (1947).
John H. Wood, Jr. (R-TX): U.S. Representative from Texas’s 2nd District was assassinated by Charles Harrelson, father of actor Woody Harrelson, in 1980. Harrelson was convicted of murder in 1982.
Dan Rostenkowski (D-IL): U.S. Representative from Illinois’s 8th District was convicted of mail fraud in 1996.
James A. Traficant Jr. (D-OH): U.S. Representative from Ohio’s 17th District was convicted of bribery, racketeering, and tax evasion in 2002.
William J. Jefferson (D-LA): U.S. Representative from Louisiana’s 2nd District was convicted of bribery in 2009.
Chaka Fattah (D-PA): U.S. Representative from Pennsylvania’s 2nd District was convicted of racketeering, fraud, and money laundering in 2016.
ETHICS ARE PROBLEMS WHETHER THE POLITICIAN IS CONVICTED OR NOT
Richard Blumenthal, Democratic senator from Connecticut was first elected to the Senate in 2010. During his campaign, it was revealed that he had made false and misleading statements about his military service during the Vietnam War, including claiming that he had “served in Vietnam.” Embarrassingly, a review of his military records revealed that he had obtained a minimum of five (probably more) military deferments from 1965 to 1970 and had never served in Vietnam.
Richard Blumenthal’s net worth in 2010 was estimated to be $73 million compared to his net worth in 2023 which is $100 million. This means that his net worth increased by about 37% in 13 years.
Elizabeth Warren claimed she was of Native American ancestry when she realized it was a great advantage to have voters think you were a native American. During her 2012 campaign for the U.S. Senate, it was revealed that she had listed herself as a minority in a directory of law professors between 1985 and 1996, after it emerged that Harvard Law School, where she taught from 1995 to 2011, had publicly described her as a Native American during her tenure there.
Warren has claimed to have Native American ancestry based on stories she heard growing up. In 2018, she released the results of a DNA test proving that her native DNA was so undetectable that it could not even be gauged. The Cherokee Nation, which is the largest Native American tribe in the United States, criticized Warren’s use of a DNA test to prove her ancestry and called it “inappropriate” and a “mockery.” She too is still making a fortune for herself.
As of 2023, Elizabeth Warren’s net worth is estimated to be $12 million. This means that her net worth has increased significantly since she first ran for office when she claimed to have nothing.
These political figures were accused of sexual misconduct and left office:
- Al Franken: Resigned as a U.S. senator for Minnesota in 2017 after multiple women accused him of sexual misconduct.
- Trent Franks: Abruptly resigned from Congress in 2017 after Speaker Paul Ryan confronted him about allegations of sexual misconduct.
- John Conyers: Resigned as a U.S. representative for Michigan in 2017 after multiple women accused him of sexual misconduct.
- Blake Farenthold: Resigned as a U.S. representative for Texas in 2018 after it was revealed that he used taxpayer money to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit.
- Ruben Kihuen: Did not seek re-election as a U.S. representative for Nevada in 2018 after multiple women accused him of sexual misconduct.
The United States Senate is not satisfied with the idea that SCOTUS will rule itself after it has proven to have failed. For that reason, rather than just examine Justice Clarence Thomas, they have begun an investigation of all justices.
Harlan Crow is currently under investigation for taking massive tax deductions based on business losses from the yacht.
Tax data obtained by journalists shows that Crow’s voyages with Justice Clarence Thomas contributed to a nice side benefit: they helped reduce Crow’s tax bill.
Crow followed the formula of deducting millions of dollars from his taxes related to buying and operating his yacht through a company that purported to charter his superyacht. However, a closer examination of how Crow used the yacht raises questions about his compliance with the tax code, experts said.
Despite Crow’s representations to the IRS, journalists could find no evidence that his yacht company was actually a profit-seeking business, as the law requires.
“Based on what information is available, this has the look of a textbook billionaire tax scam,” said Senate Finance Committee chair Ron Wyden, D-Ore. These new details only raise more questions about Mr. Crow’s tax practices, which could begin to explain why he’s been stonewalling the Finance Committee’s investigation for months.