Crow bought the house and property it sits on plus 2 adjacent lots. He/his LLC paid
for all the improvements to
the house CT's mom still lives in. My understanding is the
money was split 3 ways and she pays nothing now, as Crow mulls future establishing a CT historical
library or something at that
location.
My questions and problems with Justice Thomas and his faulty financial reports are this. This is a Supreme Court Justice. He and his clerks deal with cases all the time that involve a lot of reading,
case law, Constitutional law and money. Yet he can't seem to fill out a financial affidavit factually and oopsy, has to file amended affidavits when caught trying to obscure his financial gains and contacts on how he got them? He needs to leave the court and the SCOTUS needs a firm ETHICS rules and violations of same. They are
That was the narrative I had heard. But now Thomas is saying HE paid for improvements and that's why he sold the property at a "loss." Glad to see mom got her share (is there a source for that?) The other points I mention are still not known.
The LEAST Thomas and Crow could do is get on the same page.
on Thomas--this feels like a Bar Exam question asking you to spot the issues and describe what further information you would need to know. EG:
Why no fair market value listed on the sale-tax document after putting all that money into it?
Was mama paying rent before? Was there a mortgage she was paying off? If so, did she pay all of the payments or 1/3?
Was mama paying tax and insurance before? Why, if it belonged to all three?
Did mama and brother family actually get THEIR 44K (the 133K divided by 3)
Did mama and brother pay for any of the improvements? Why not if they were co-owners
How was this all treated on income tax. Did CT claim it as a loss? How about mama and brother's family?
What was the basis in the house?
Where did mama et al get the house? Family home--from deceased dad? When? Basis bumped up to what?
Crow bought the house and property it sits on plus 2 adjacent lots. He/his LLC paid
for all the improvements to
the house CT's mom still lives in. My understanding is the
money was split 3 ways and she pays nothing now, as Crow mulls future establishing a CT historical
library or something at that
location.
My questions and problems with Justice Thomas and his faulty financial reports are this. This is a Supreme Court Justice. He and his clerks deal with cases all the time that involve a lot of reading,
case law, Constitutional law and money. Yet he can't seem to fill out a financial affidavit factually and oopsy, has to file amended affidavits when caught trying to obscure his financial gains and contacts on how he got them? He needs to leave the court and the SCOTUS needs a firm ETHICS rules and violations of same. They are
NOT above the LAW or the
theConstitution of our country.
That was the narrative I had heard. But now Thomas is saying HE paid for improvements and that's why he sold the property at a "loss." Glad to see mom got her share (is there a source for that?) The other points I mention are still not known.
The LEAST Thomas and Crow could do is get on the same page.
The NYTIMES has had really good coverage on this. It's got a breakdown of who, what, where and $. You could find it in their archives. If you have a
problem, let me know and I will pull up the link and post here. Thomas and Crow will now be doing a CYA on all of this, you vet.
I’m a New York Times subscriber. I’ll look