Quote:
Originally Posted by whell
I know you do. I'm asking if you have anything beyond your (and ProPublica's) speculation that supports your belief. So far, you've provided nothing.
You're willing to believe that there's "evidence of bribery" in Thomas's case. I'm willing to believe that ethical lines were crossed, but I don't see evidence of bribery. What's the difference then, assuming that your "evidence of bribery" continues to be something that can't be produced?
You blame me and tell me I'm all MAGA and shit because I don't see the same "evidence of bribery" that you do, even though you can't provide examples of this evidence.
Did it ever occur to you that maybe this issue isn't me?
|
So, accepting multi-millions over two decades in exchange for consistent conservative votes on the SCOTUS doesn't strike you as corrupt? Figures.