Weinergate

[Kulaf]

Because it's just too good of a title not to post.

[Ddrak]

Tweeting weiners is just silly.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

His account was hacked/this was a prank.

But they can't prove with certitude if it was or was not Weiner's wiener.

Though he doesn't really have anyone looking for a culprit and pressing charges... That alone stinks to high heaven that he's probably guilty of doing this on his own. Which really wouldn't surprise me, the guy is a slimeball.

[Harlowe]

If we're talking slime-balls, this diversion was most likely do to the info dump on last Friday about Judge Thomas and his shady wife, than weiners. Since Weiner was the one pressing for disclosure and sure enough, there was a huge conflict of interest.

[Kulaf]

"Shady wife"? Why, because she is exercising her rights as a citizen to be involved in politics? She was lobying for 10 years before Clarence Thomas was nominated to the Supreme Court. Funny how only now when she is involved with the Tea Party that it is a "problem".

[Harlowe]

Oh spare me the false indignation, it's a conflict of interest if you receive money from organizations that are lobbying for issues your husband votes in favor of. Are you kidding me....

He should have been recusing himself. They are both shady.

But weiners are more important to the public interest.

[Kulaf]

What issues? Care to post them?

[Fallakin Kuvari]

What she receives money for has nothing to do with what he votes for or against.

Seriously... you're on the "OMG CLARENCE THOMAS" train? Are you that far gone HarLOL?

[Ddrak]

Thomas should absolutely recuse himself from any issue his wife has received money to lobby either for or against. To not do so is a very clear conflict of interests.

From US Code, Title 28, Part I, Chapter 21, § 455:

(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

This alone is enough, but it goes further:

(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:

(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:

(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;

None of this says that his wife doesn't have the right to be politically active, it just says that a judge needs to recuse himself from issues that his wife has been paid to lobby. If he doesn't, then he opens his wife up to a whole mess of litigation according to the last part of that piece of the US Code.

Dd

[Kulaf]

Well first of all I would take exception to whether a lobyist technically holds a "financial interest" as defined in the law in question:

(4) “financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small, or a relationship as director, adviser, or other active participant in the affairs of a party, except that:

Lobyists are paid to advance a position. They do not "advise" nor are they an active participant in the affairs of the party.

But let's put that asside and deal with the fact that SCOTUS primarily involves itself in Constitutional law. The "big deal" about this has come about from proponents of the Health Care bill and their feeling that somehow should it ever be reviewed for constitutioality, that becasue Clarence Thomas's wife is a Tea Party supporter and the Tea Party is against the bill that somehow that means Thomas should recuse himself from rendering his legal opinion.

Absurd.

[Ddrak]

From an ethical point of view I'd consider a paid lobbying as having a financial interest, whether you can split technicalities or not. To me, that's the ONLY part that matters. His wife is entitled to her beliefs and party memberships, just not to be financially involved in the position.

Dd

[Kulaf]

Seems the wiener.....was Weirner's:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43299964/ns ... ?GT1=43001

[Ddrak]

/gasp!

[Fallakin Kuvari]

Called it.

[Fallakin Kuvari]

And the Weiner resigns.