Clarence Thomas: “Come on guys, I really need this ruling.”
Now the politicians want tips?!
Remember highest tipper gets to control the Domi.
Wait. I shouldn’t make that joke- sex work is way more honest.
Sounds like someone could use a little treat.
Posted this in another thread on the issue but worth saying again because most people see to be confused as to the actual implications of this ruling:
Although a gratuity or reward offered and accepted by a state or local official after the official act may be unethical or illegal under other federal, state, or local laws, the gratuity does not violate §666.
Tldr the ruling only was about in relation to one law. The party may be guilty of a form of corruption under a different law.
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/23-108_8n5a.pdf
Read page 2 of the syllabus where it says “Held:” until page 4 if you want the shorter version.
Otherwise there’s a 16 page explanation under the “opinion of the court” section directly after the syllabus, for those who are interested in a longer explanation.
Can I get a teal deer for that tldr?
TLDR of the TLDR:
Court said the gov charged him with the wrong thing. Look for another charge, he’s probably screwed.
Except SCOTUS will just strike down the next one too. The modern court has never supported bribery charges that come before it.
Edit to add a quick history from the last 25 years.
Sun Diamond Growers - The government must prove the bribe is actually connected to the act.
Skilling - Corruption charges require a second party to give you a bribe or kickback, self dealing is fine.
Citizens United - Money is political speech, and you can spend as much as you want on an election.
McDonnell - Acting as a pay to play gatekeeper is fine. Even if the government connects the bribe to the act.
Ted Cruz - Politicians can keep unspent campaign funds as long as they maintain the fiction of having lent the campaign money.
Snyder - Kickbacks aren’t actionable. <- We are here.
Next up “donor” patches for clothing, donor branded shoes, and donor outfits. Have our state officials look like NASCAR.
i love how the standard went from “the appearance of impropriety” to “you know what, just leave the money on the counter”.
NOT THAT COUNTER!!! That is the bribe counter! You put it NEXT the bribe counter so nobody gets the wrong idea.
No that’s fine too, we’ll just blow up the journalist and bury the story. #PanamaPapers
These people are all trash. All of them. Not a single decent MAGA in existence.
[OLIGARCHY INTENSIFIES]
This is clearly a dark road to go down and a terrible idea for the country. I personally couldn’t be anymore against this.
That said should there not be stricter rules on titles on a news subreddit? A lot of the titles I’ve seen recently are clearly prejudiced or undescriptive.
I think it’s important we maintain a high level of accuracy on news subreddits to limit the spread of misinformation.
There are already rules. One of the rules is that the title of the post has to match the title of the article. This post follows that rule.
That title is directly from the article. You think the OP should instead use their own title?
This is not a subreddit, and this is the original article’s title.
Right? Dude thinks this is reddit.
Is pepsi okay?
That’s exactly what Pepsi is.
What do we call the Lemmy version of a subreddit?
Community.
Thank you
And I get embarrassed by Indiana once again. Sigh.
Remember kids, bribes are a sometimes food 🙃
Politicians can legally be bribed after the fact now. Phew, what a relief.
I guess step two is to decide exactly how many hours a bribe needs to be given, before doing someone a favour, for it to just be considered a gift.
Just a reminder that bullets can be bribes.
It depends on how they’re delivered. Generally bullets are interpreted as a threat.
Vocabulary question X + shell + powder = bullet, what is X?
Because usually the threat is that X will be delivered through use of powder the destination of the shell is ambiguous but not included in the delivery.
When you deliver while (unfired) bullets it’s generally not considered a threat.
People are way overreacting to this. This decision was 100% about a federal statute. Unaffected are the MANY, MANY state and local laws preventing state and local government employees from taking gifts
What state’s jurisdiction covers DC?
Guillotine
🛎️ SHAME!
Maybe a bit of flogging?
Oh Arin ! That’s your sokution to everything ☝️☝️😁
Worked for the French 🤷♂️
It’s why they got elected.
They weren’t elected.
*Appointed
