Constitutional principle he voted in favor of money being speech under the first amendment. >> so the question for him is, what does this $4 million say? and i think you can look to the menendez trial where this gentleman testified today, therefore, $60,000 i hoped to influence a criminal investigation. what does $4 million get you? because i don't think there's any doubt that if clarence thomas where a random law firm partner in dc, nobody is taking him on trips to bali or anywhere else for free. but what i think it does by is an ethically compromised justice who, when the next voting rights act case comes before the court, when the next dobbs opinion comes before what is he going to say? is there any doubt that had he voted the other way in dobbs, for example, to overrule roe versus wade. what he's still be getting this money. i mean, these are the questions you raise when you are accepting this level of money from political people who are very wealthy, why are you working? you don't agree with due respect and i'm i'm here as the only non-lawyer at the