Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?

[Mik]

As I said.

[George K]

WSJ:

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=

The left’s assault on the Supreme Court is continuing, and the latest front is the news that Justice Clarence Thomas has a rich friend who has hosted the Justice on his private plane, his yacht, and his vacation resort. That’s it. That’s the story. Yet this non-bombshell has triggered breathless claims that the Court must be investigated, and that Justice Thomas must resign or be impeached. Those demands give away the real political game here.

---

ProPublica, a left-leaning website, kicked off the fun with a report Thursday that Justice Thomas has a longtime friendship with Harlan Crow, a wealthy Texas real-estate developer. The intrepid reporters roamed far and wide to discover that the Justice has sometimes traveled on Mr. Crow’s “Bombardier Global 5000 jet” and that each summer the Justice and his wife spend a vacation week at Mr. Crow’s place in the Adirondacks.

The piece is loaded with words and phrases intended to convey that this is all somehow disreputable: “superyacht”; “luxury trips”; “exclusive California all-male retreat”; “sprawling ranch”; “private chefs”; “elegant accommodation”; “opulent lodge”; “lavishing the justice with gifts.” And more.

Adjectival overkill is the method of bad polemicists who don’t have much to report. The ProPublica writers suggest that Justice Thomas may have violated ethics rules, and they quote a couple of cherry-picked ethicists to express

But it seems clear that the Court’s rules at the time all of this happened did not require that gifts of personal hospitality be disclosed. This includes the private plane trips. ProPublica fails to make clear to readers that the U.S. Judicial Conference recently changed its rules to require more disclosure. The new rules took effect last month.

Justice Thomas would have been obliged to disclose gifts that posed a conflict of interest involving cases that would be heard by the High Court. But there is no evidence that Mr. Crow has had any such business before the Court, and Mr. Crow says he has “never asked about a pending or lower court case.”

The most ProPublica can come up with is that “Crow has deep connections in conservative politics.” Oh dear. One hilarious section reports that a painting at Mr. Crow’s New York resort includes Mr. Crow, Justice Thomas and three friends smoking cigars. One of the friends is Leonard Leo, “the Federalist Society leader regarded as an architect of the Supreme Court’s recent turn to the right,” ProPublica says.

This conspiracy is so secret that it’s hiding in plain sight. Can anyone imagine such a story ever being written about a liberal Justice on the Court?

....

“Is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas corrupt? I don’t know,” tweeted Democratic Rep. Ted Lieu. “But his secretive actions absolutely have the appearance of corruption. And he apparently violated the law. For the good of the country, he should resign.” You gotta love the “I don’t know” but he should resign anyway formulation.

The liberal press—pardon the redundancy—has climbed onto its ethical high horse and is demanding “reform” at the Court. “All of this needs robust investigation,” demanded Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse. Senate Judiciary Chairman Dick Durbin dutifully saluted upon Mr. Whitehouse’s order and said his committee “will act” to impose a new “enforceable code of conduct” for the Court.

This ethics talk is really about setting up an apparatus that politicians can then use against the Justices if there is any transgression, however minor or inadvertent. The claims of corruption are intended to smear the conservative Justices and tarnish the Court to tee up case recusals, impeachment or a Court-packing scheme if Democrats get enough Senate votes to break the filibuster.

It’s all ugly politics, but the left is furious it lost control of the Court, and it wants it back by whatever means possible.

[Jolly]

Pretty much sums it up.

[Mik]

And yet Hunter’s activities where cash was delivered are simply good business.

[Jolly]

@Mik said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:

And yet Hunter’s activities where cash was delivered are simply good business.

What is it George sez about the press and the DNC?

[jon-nyc]

I haven’t paid close attention - really 500k? One trip?

[Jolly]

RINO

[jon-nyc]

@Doctor-Phibes you wanna field this one?

[jon-nyc]

@Jolly

So you’re honestly not at all bothered by a SCOTUS justice taking a half-mil worth of favors in a single trip?

[Jolly]

Not a whole bunch. I knew a long time ago, that Washington does not live like normal Americans. There are very few jobs I can think of, where you leave with many multiples of your salary in investments or in the bank.

[jon-nyc]

I’m having trouble imagining a similar reaction from you if this were, say, Soros treating Sotomayor.

[Jolly]

Admittedly, I think Soros would definitely expect something in return. AFAIK, Thomas' friend had had no litigation in front of the judge to be ruled upon.

Now, if you can show me where the guy was buying Thomas' vote, I'd be upset.

[Doctor Phibes]

@jon-nyc said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:

@Doctor-Phibes you wanna field this one?

I suspect I'd be wasting my time. It's no often that I know I'm right, but I do here.

Judges should pay for their own holidays.

[jon-nyc]

@Doctor-Phibes

I was thinking you might want to address the fine distinction between source consideration and messenger shooting.

[Jolly]

Or, we could discuss the closet liberal, who wouldn't have had any problems with anything Ginsburg ever did.

Face it, lad, you can put all the lace around it you wish, but at the end of the day, Washington is about perception and power. If the pols or judges are doing what you perceive to be good for the country, you probably don't care if the person wears a goat mask to the weekly orgies.

I think Thomas primarily rules on original intent, and I think he tries to adhere to the Constitution. I don't think the Wise Latina does.

So yes, I'd have more problem with her behavior than his. But...it's Washington. They're ALL crooked, to one extent or the other. And if Thomas could make a phone call and help your foundation immensely or give you a favorable ruling from the bench concerning same, you'd love the man until the end of time.

[Doctor Phibes]

@Jolly basically you’re saying he’s a crook but at least he’s your crook?

[Doctor Phibes]

@jon-nyc said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:

@Doctor-Phibes

I was thinking you might want to address the fine distinction between source consideration and messenger shooting.

Horace has already set me straight on that point. Apparently it’s completely different when I do it as I’m driven by emotion. Conservatives can’t be driven by emotions as they don’t have any.

[Horace]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:

@jon-nyc said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:

@Doctor-Phibes

I was thinking you might want to address the fine distinction between source consideration and messenger shooting.

Horace has already set me straight on that point. Apparently it’s completely different when I do it as I’m driven by emotion.

I considered you to be someone who would be sympathetic to consideration of sources, that's all.

Conservatives can’t be driven by emotions as they don’t have any.

It's fine to have emotions and even to be ruled by them to whatever extent you'd like. Those of us incapable of any depth of thought, have little else to form opinions on, in any case. The issue is when people's opinions are based on their emotional truths, and they impose those opinions on others, via the cultural ideas and politics we all have to live with.

[Jolly]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Did Clarence Thomas Do anything Wrong?:

@Jolly basically you’re saying he’s a crook but at least he’s your crook?

I'm saying several things:

1. Nobody has come up with anything (and I assure you, they're like a cat that drank a bottle of laxitive and is digging holes for shit as fast as he can) that shows where this has affected any of Thomas' votes or rulings.
2. Rich people have rich friends.
3. Crooks? Not necessarily. Compromised? Every one of them, to one extent or another. It's politics. It's how the game is played in the big leagues. And shucks, sometimes they are crooks. I voted for Edwin Edwards twice. A man who gleefully admitted he was a crook, but he stole for the good people of Louisiana.

[Mik]

Who says one trip was worth $500k? How is that even possible?