4 ms·
No one is holding him responsible for her actions. He should recuse himself to avoid the appearance of impropriety, and that's what most of the conversation is
by spacemanmatt 5y ago
No one is holding him responsible for her actions. He should recuse himself to avoid the appearance of impropriety, and that's what most of the conversation is about. It's hardly controversial, but there are lots of commenters who think somehow Clarence Thomas is being or can be punished for anything to do with this.
- Overtonwindow 5y agoThen if he’s not responsible then he doesn’t have to recuse himself. It doesn’t quite work that way. If that were the case, then maybe we need to start monitoring the text messages of the families of the other justices. Just so we’re sure when they need to recuse them selves we can tell them.
- Ekaros 5y agoI'm actually starting to think that absolutely all communication by elected and public officials should be made automatically public and should not be hidden for any reasons.