September 28, 2020

The effort to cancel the one black person on the Court.

On the front page of The Washington Post right now:



Can you even guess what that's about? I tried and I guessed wrong. I thought maybe there was a prediction that Justice Thomas might be conscious of a likelihood that he'd be leaving the Court within the next 4 years and he might be swayed by a desire to control who appoints his replacement. But, no, that would also be a ground to demand that Justice Breyer recuse himself.

Here's the column. The reason is that he might be carrying a decades-long grudge against Joe Biden for the way he ran the Senate Judiciary Committee in the hearings on his confirmation.
Thomas wrote in his memoir “My Grandfather’s Son” that he looks back at the process in “horror and disgust.” Thomas described the hearing in which he responded to Anita Hill’s sexual harassment accusations as “a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. Senate rather than hung from a tree.”

“A few days before I faced the Judiciary Committee, Joseph Biden invited Virginia [Thomas’s wife] and me to tour the Caucus Room in the Russell Senate Office Building where the hearings would take place,” Thomas wrote. He said Biden was reassuring, stressing that the hearings weren’t meant to be an ordeal. “He said that since I’d be nervous at first, he would start the questioning with a few ‘softballs’ that would help me relax and do my best, assuring me that he had no tricks up his sleeve.”

On the morning of the hearing, wrote Thomas, “Senator Biden was the first questioner. Instead of the softball questions he’d promised to ask, he threw a beanball straight at my head, quoting from a speech that I’d given four years earlier at the Pacific Legal Foundation and challenging me to defend what I’d said.”

At the break in the proceedings, young lawyers who had helped Thomas prepare for the hearing looked at the text of the speech quoted by Biden. “The point I’d been making [in the speech] was the opposite of the one that Senator Biden claimed I had made.” Thomas later referred to a favorite recording, “Smiling Faces Sometimes,” which warns against trusting people who pretend they are your friend while secretly planning to do you wrong. “Now I knew I’d met one of them: Senator Biden’s smooth insincere promises that he would treat me fairly were nothing but talk.”

Before the committee vote, Thomas said he spoke to Biden on the phone.

“Biden came on the line. I held the receiver sideways so that Virginia could hear him speak as we stood together in the kitchen,” Thomas wrote. Biden explained why he couldn’t vote for him, after which Thomas said, “That’s fine. It’s doesn’t matter to me whether I’m confirmed or not. But I entered this process with a good name, and I want to have it at the end.”

Thomas wrote that Biden replied, “Judge, I know you don’t believe me, but if any of these last two matters come up [referring to Anita Hill’s allegations as well as a leaked draft opinion he had written as an appellate judge that had drawn criticism], I will be your biggest defender.”

“He was right about one thing,” Thomas wrote. “I didn’t believe him. Neither did Virginia. As he reassured me of his goodwill, she grabbed a spoon from the silverware drawer, opened her mouth wide, stuck out her tongue as far as she could, and pretended to gag herself.”

Thomas, in a recent documentary, condemned the hearings, charging that they they were designed to “get rid of me” because they viewed him the “wrong” African American for the high court.

Given these statements, does anyone really believe that Thomas can impartially hear a case impacting Biden and come to an opinion based on the law and facts?
I don't usually quote so much from an article, but most of that is quotation from Thomas's book. I think it's a terrible idea that Senators can mistreat a judicial candidate and then silence him once he's on the Court. Should Kavanaugh recuse himself every time anything related to Kamala Harris comes up in the Supreme Court? This would give Senators an incentive to abuse — not that they need more incentive — every nominee put up by a President who isn't a member of their party.

Quite aside from Thomas, we're all able to read that account and use it to judge Joe Biden.

129 comments:

Amadeus 48 said...

Well, you know, Biden did lead a lynch party.

If I were that writer, I wouldn't be bringing up the treatment of Clarence Thomas by Joe Biden. I am still angry about it.

wendybar said...

Maybe they should cancel Joe Biden instead. He seems to be the problem. Why do Progressives hate blacks and women so much???

Browndog said...

All weekend I kept seeing how Barret must recuse herself in all abortion cases because of her religious fanaticism.

I suspect it's only right all GOP Senators recuse themselves from the hearing and vote because of their blatant partisanship. Is Jeff Sessions the last "fair" republican?

Amadeus 48 said...

By the way, we have all been able to form an opinion about Joe Biden over the last 48 years. I concluded years ago that he was a phony back-slapper with an IQ of 95 and a vicious streak. Nothing I have seen recently has caused me to revise that opinion, although he clearly is failing and may be suffering from dementia as well.

I look at my friends who say they are going to vote for him in wonder. Have they taken leave of their senses?

R C Belaire said...

Battlefield prep.

Roy Lofquist said...

If Justice Thomas does not hold a grudge he is a candidate for beatification. I personally hope that the Honorable Justice has the opportunity to screw him hard.

WisRich said...

I think we're at the "Grasping at straws" phase.

Tina Trent said...

It's because of that damn time Amy Coney Barrett put a public hair on her Diet Coke can and made jokes about it to her judicial clerk, of course.

Humperdink said...

WaPoo should have tried the 3/5 of a person angle.

Qwinn said...

High tech lynchings have consequences? Who knew?

Hilarious, this push to not only eliminate the negative consequences of conducting a high tech lynching, but to actually reward those who did it.

Robert Marshall said...

So dishonest, abusive behavior towards a judicial nominee gets a Senator lifetime protection against the judgment of that person if/when confirmed to a judicial post?

Interesting set of incentives you're building there, Washington Post!

Temujin said...

Democrats have a history on this. They ask, publicly, for any Republican or Conservative who is in a position to make a decision against their wishes, to recuse themselves. It's always about the Republicans or Conservatives who have to leave. It is NEVER a liberal/progressive who has to leave. Quite the opposite. Progressives are lauded for stating their beliefs out loud, no matter how bizarre they may be. Conservatives know that, in groups, they have to remain silent. In the media, they are allowed only on one network. In the press, only in a handful of publications.

Yet there are more conservatives in the nation than there are progressives. Still- progressives do the demanding, conservatives stay quiet. So how did we get to this point that a light-thinking Journalist! from Jeff Bezo's Washington Post gets to create a demand for Clarence Thomas to recuse himself? Did Colbert King actually read the entire book about Justice Thomas's life? If he did, he certainly didn't get it, didn't understand what it had to say.

Not surprising. He is a Journalist! Still, it's a ridiculous request, and if he has any inkling at all about the nature of Clarence Thomas's character, he should already know the answer to his request.

Ken B said...

So, try to get a 4-4 court, and demand recusals.
The goal is not really to get him to recuse though, just to undermine the court's standing.
Some people want violence.

Giovan Pietro Bellori said...

Any of these assholes ever demand RBG recuse herself from abortion cases because her role at Planned Parenthood?

Lucid-Ideas said...

Everyone who's anyone knows that Thomas ain't no ways black.

Stephen said...

RBG on Donald Trump: "He is a faker. He has no consistency about him. He says whatever comes into his head at the moment. He really has an ego. ... How has he gotten away with not turning over his tax returns? The press seems to be very gentle with him on that …."

If she were alive, the WaPo could not have run its recusal opinion piece on Clarence Thomas.

Unknown said...

I suppose Kav. ought also recuse?

I Have Misplaced My Pants said...

None of that makes me think anything bad about Justice Thomas, but everything bad about that POS Biden.

However, I'm not a trained circus seal like most of the WaPo readers who are mostly idiots who think they are the smart ones.

Also your last two paragraphs are awesome, Althouse.

madAsHell said...

Ummmmm......a grudge? That’s the way the game is played!

Mike Sylwester said...

I think Biden voted to confirm Thomas.

Larry J said...

Revenge is a dish best served cold, and if there's anyone deserving of revenge, it's Joe Biden. Biden has always been a profoundly stupid and arrogant man, and whatever health issues he is experiencing certainly aren't improving things. The only thing dumber than Joe Biden is anyone who thinks Biden is mentally fit to be president.

Birkel said...

New rule:
Being a dick in public to people gives you lifelong immunity from those people holding a grudge that you were a dick to them.

Old rule:
Don't be a dick.

Analysis:
Democraticals understand that they are going to lose this election.
Bigly.

Kevin said...

Thomas screwing Biden out of the Presidency would be the perfect ending to 2020.

#BlackJusiticesMatter

lgv said...

"I concluded years ago that he was a phony back-slapper with an IQ of 95 and a vicious streak."

I think you are being generous on the IQ front.

Fernandinande said...

The logic is "We should give Biden an advantage because he acted like an asshole."

It makes perfect sense. To Biden.

Article: "Trump is trusting that with Barrett, decisions are sure to land in his favor. Thus, Trump’s declaration: “I think it’s very important that we have nine justices.”

You need an odd number to avoid a tie, dummy.

iowan2 said...

This is all narrative setting. The writers and editors know what is posted, is not based on fact, or logic. The only purpose to lie and smear.(seems like I've seen that before?) My fantasy would be for ACB to give the Barr response about recusal.
"Recuse? Me? No. I have no reason to recuse. Next question"

Unknown said...

Then came the smiler with the knife under his cloak.

jaydub said...

Chickens meet roost.

iowan2 said...

I do wish Thomas would make a public statement and explain that yes he will spend his last years on the bench to punish Biden, and the rest of the Dems, for the lies the told about him and Kavanaugh. The impeachment trial would be glorious, and and hour before the vote, he would resign anyway.

Gahrie said...

In a sane world, there would be inspirational movies made about Thomas's life.

Ambrose said...

I think justices should recuse themselves from cases where they might vote against the left's desired outcome. It's only fair and I think this might have been one of RBG's dying wishes too.

JAORE said...

Well, Colbert could/should there have been a recusal when the ACA case came up?

Or is this still another purity test that only applies to the right?

frenchy said...

There's a saying for this and it's not conflict of interest, but rather it's that which comes around goes around.

Nonapod said...

Maybe they should cancel Joe Biden instead. He seems to be the problem.

Exactly. Clarence Thomas did nothing wrong. Biden did. And anyone who uses the excuse that it was "just politics" as if that somehow absolves bad behavior is either being disingenuous or is an idiot.

SensibleCitizen said...

I was enthralled by those hearings. I remember admiring Orin Hatch and Joe Biden greatly, although Joe talked way too much. Joe then and now... my god.

The on-trend word at the time was "pejorative." As in: "When I say blah blah negative blah, I don't mean that pejoratively, I say blah blah negative blah as an observation."

Biden also said, "I want to slow down and explain what's happening to the non-lawyers out there who are watching this." Which was kind of nice, except that he grandstanded and spoke ad nauseam.

Biden was exceedingly polite and supportive of Clarence Thomas. If you think he would hold a grudge, you didn't watch the hearings.

stevew said...

Justice Thomas might hold a grudge over the way he was treated by Biden during his confirmation? Well, that would indicate Post agrees that Biden treated Thomas poorly.

Love these Leftists that can't help themselves from giving their political opponents advice on how they should act. /s

Jersey Fled said...

Did Ginsburg disqualify herself from all cases involving the ACLU?

Mark O said...

Biden's savage attacks on only the second black man nominated to the SC, should be played in a Trump ad. Biden's behavior was beyond racist.

tim in vermont said...

"I concluded years ago that he was a phony back-slapper with an IQ of 95 and a vicious streak.”

He used to be smarter before his brain aneurism, but maybe he just looked smart with the help of a lot of plagiarism. For instance that “river of power” quote he did on the Judiciary committee is plagiarized. I wish I had on of those tools to detect it, but if you substitute “money” for “power,” not only does the quote make more sense, but it comes right out of some novel I read many years back. It always stuck with me, just like it stuck with Biden.

I keep mentioning this because I am hoping some college professor with a plagiarism tool can run it and find the exact passage he stole.

Mike of Snoqualmie said...

Joe Biden deserves to get it good and hard. He, along with the despicable Ted Kennedy, created the hostile work environment of judicial hearings. I hope Justice Thomas gives good ol' Joe the thrashing he deserves.

Big Mike said...

The reason is that he might be carrying a decades-long grudge against Joe Biden for the way he ran the Senate Judiciary Committee in the hearings on his confirmation.

Ha! I guessed right. The notion that an honest and honorable individual should have to stand aside due to the treatment he or she received at the hands of a slimeball is something only a Dumbocrat could come up with.

Nor should Justice Kavanaugh recuse himself from a possible future case involving Dianne Feinstein.

PhilD said...

"Barret must recuse herself in all abortion cases because of her religious fanaticism"

Would that mean that pro-abortionists should recuse themselves too because of their pro-abortion fanaticism?


Related, a question I sometimes think about. If there is no God wouldn't that make religious opinions opinions just like atheist opinions? Nothing more but also nothing less.

bagoh20 said...

So once again the Democrats expect us to protect the one who did wrong and punish the victim. The Dems don't seem to be able to accept any appointment or election that does not go their way, and they expect that the term of the office should end as soon as any important decision comes up. They are such despicable and dishonest people at every turn.

bagoh20 said...

Maybe the lesson is don't be an asshole to people, because someday they might be asked to treat you fairly. Some people do not want treated fairly for obvious reasons.

tim in vermont said...

"Biden was exceedingly polite and supportive of Clarence Thomas. If you think he would hold a grudge, you didn't watch the hearings.”

That’s right! During the primaries, his support for Thomas was used against him under the general umbrella of #MeToo. A movement that the Democrats found inconvenient and so smothered.

Michael K said...

Giovan Pietro Bellori said... [hush]​[hide comment]
Any of these assholes ever demand RBG recuse herself from abortion cases because her role at Planned Parenthood?


Exactly. I was waiting to see if anyone else had that comment.

MD Greene said...

Oh, I see. Thomas should recuse himself because Biden acted like a prick and lied when he promised not to sabotage Thomas' judiciary committee appearance. Naturally this means that Thomas should be the bigger man while Joe is allowed to be the same creep he's always been.

Interesting feint, that.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

Oft evil will shall evil mar

Gee, Joe, looks like you could be facing some "bad luck"

Big Mike said...

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

The left are segregationists & racists.

Period.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Joe Biden is, was, and will always be... a piece of shit.

hombre said...

Every time it appears the leftmediaswine can go no lower they take it down a notch.

Drago said...

Ken B: "So, try to get a 4-4 court, and demand recusals.
The goal is not really to get him to recuse though, just to undermine the court's standing.
Some people want violence."

When you're right, you're right.

rcocean said...

Exactly. The DNC/WaPo position is moronic. If a Senator treats a Judge badly, the Judge should recuse himself because he might be biased against the Senator! Only a liberal could make that argument with a straight-face. This means by the way, that Kavanaugh should recuse himself too, because Kamala Harris was nasty to him during HIS hearing, and that Alioto should recuse himself too, because Biden voted against Alioto.

BTW, before we knew Ginsburg was dying, did anyone at the WaPo suggest she should recuse herself in cases related to Trump because she'd publicly attacked Trump? Answer: No.

rcocean said...

If you look at what Biden SAYS and ACTS and not his MANNER, you'll see he's a liar and a rather nasty character. But he seems to be made out of Teflon. He's just "Good Ol'Joe" no matter what. BTW, he's lied about not knowing about the Dossier and the FBI going after General Flynn AND not knowing his son was up to his eyeballs in Russian/Chinese Graft and Corruption.

His son went to China on Air Force 2 - Biden's plane, and came back with a Billion $Chinese$ dollars for his hedge fund. His son was also receiving $3 Million from the Mayor of Moscow's wife while Biden was VP. But "Good ol' Joe" is just a working stiff from Scranton PA, and honest as the day is long.

BTW, did you know his son Beau died and that is wife was killed in a car crash 45 years ago? If you didn't know it, you'll hear about it during the debate.

Mary Beth said...

Mike Sylwester said...

I think Biden voted to confirm Thomas.
9/28/20, 8:41 AM


He did not.

Skeptical Voter said...

Should the "Notorious RBG" the progressives secular saint have recused herself from all matters before the Supreme Court where one of the parties was represented by the ACLU? After all she had been general counsel for the ACLU before going on the bench.

The lefties-like the clown who wrote this columln always have a fine whine when they get worked up. But that whine has a bitter aftertaste.

Yancey Ward said...

Mike Sylwester said...

"I think Biden voted to confirm Thomas."

He may have voted to move the confirmation to the floor for a vote (I would have to check this), but Biden voted against confirmation.

There two Republicans who voted against the nomination- Packwood and Jeffords (who later became a Democrat). There were a number of Democrats who voted for Thomas' confirmation, but they were all southerners except for Dixon from Illinois and Exon from Nebraska.

Gahrie said...

Ummmmm......a grudge? That’s the way the game is played!

It's the way the Democrats play the game against the Republicans, now, but remember Thomas was only their second victim. Thomas was Borked, just like the Democrats have tried to Bork every Republican nominee since. Meanwhile Democratic nominees get confirmed after 45 days with a 96-3 vote.

Narayanan said...

Isn't it for the plaintiff to make the case for recusal?

If the article advocated that Biden lawyers should/would/could - no foul

I look forward to Biden lawyers making the case

are journalists = amicus curiae for USSC for ever and ever?

Mary Beth said...

Democrats continue to treat Black men as if they are less capable of rational thought than other people.

BleachBit-and-Hammers said...

Joe Biden is a crook and a liar. He's a total fraud and now he is merely a puppet to the extreme left.

Gunner said...

Does the WashPo think Republicans get to take advantage of this to recuse a liberal Justice? Somehow I doubt it.

Achilles said...

So Biden is a piece of shit.

So is anyone that votes for him.

Narayanan said...

Michael K said...
Giovan Pietro Bellori said... [hush]​[hide comment]
Any of these assholes ever demand RBG recuse herself from abortion cases because her role at Planned Parenthood?

Exactly. I was waiting to see if anyone else had that comment.
-----------============

Q: why did not any of the opposing side lawyers? bad strategy + fools to boot or RINO DNA

traditionalguy said...

Remember General Trump is our commander now. So Biden is the poor dumb bastard dying for his Party this time. And this time we get to be the ones greasing our tank treads with Dem guts. And General Trump never recuses his Army out of fear or payola. Poor Dems.

Drago said...

The democraticals and their LLR-lefty minions, particular the LLR-lefty minions in Michigan, really do hate that black conservative guy on the Supreme Court, don't they?

tsk tsk tsk

RobinGoodfellow said...

“ The reason is that he might be carrying a decades-long grudge against Joe Biden for the way he ran the Senate Judiciary Committee in the hearings on his confirmation.”

Yeah, well karma’s a bitch.

PM said...

Bidenfreude!

Todd said...

True to form, that is just the Washington Post warning him not to get all "uppity", after all a "justice" should know his place. Right progressives?

Joe Smith said...

"Yeah, well karma’s a bitch."

My first thought was, payback is a motherfucker...but close enough.

Joe Smith said...

@PM at 10:16am

Genius : )

Swede said...

"Hey guyz, Biden was a real piece of shit to Thomas, so really the only fair thing is for Thomas to recuse himself".

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

No.

Martin said...

As a reason for Thomas to recse himself, utter garbage.

As insight into Joe Biden, priceless.

Big Mike said...

I never much respected Colbert King back when I lived near DC and subscribed to the Post. But as a member of the GOP I have to thank him for reminding black voters that Joe Biden once led a lynch mob against a black man.

tim in vermont said...

I almost want to renew my subscription to the New York Times just to search up what they said about him and Anita Hill during the primaries. What the hell, somebody else must have covered it... Looky here!

New York City (CNN)Anita Hill said she's "ready to hold Joe Biden accountable" for his role in leading the confirmation hearing of now-Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, whom she publicly accused of sexual harassment nearly 30 years ago.

"Have I forgiven Joe Biden? I'm ready to move on, but I am also ready to hold Joe Biden accountable. Accountability means acknowledging your role in a problem and the harm it's caused. Acknowledging that you have culpability," Hill told CNN's Christiane Amanpour at the CITIZEN by CNN conference in New York on Thursday.


Of course he never did that, but the partisan Democrat is on board anyway endorsing him. Whatever it takes to put a Democrat in control of the graft!

I don’t see how Thomas would hold a grudge though. This is just more mud throwing which Thomas will rise above, as usual.

Sam L. said...

Ahh, the WaPoo WaPooping!

AllenS said...

Good work, Mary Beth.

Tommy Duncan said...

This backwards. Biden's treatment of Supreme Court nominees should disqualify him from the Presidency. Because of his behavior, Biden should not be allowed to participate in the process of nominating and confirming Supreme Court candidates.

Jupiter said...

It certainly appears that the Democrats are planning to throw this one into the courts.

The Godfather said...

Seriously though, if the outcome of the Presidential election is decided by the Supreme Court, I hope the decision doesn’t follow party lines.

T said...

Although I expect Justice Thomas to maintain his standards and render a fair decision if one is called for, it sounds like someone on the left is worried about a whole buncha Karma. So appointments have consequences as well as elections. . . whooda thunk it?

mikee said...

Having been confirmed to a lifetime appointment despite the vileness of Joe Biden, all Justice Thomas has to do is don the black robe each fall and rule asw he sees fit, secure in the absolute knowledge that nothing he could possibly do would ever, ever, ever be as biased as most of the rulings written by Notorious RBG.

TreeJoe said...

Someone should ask the Biden camp about this article. Does he agree or not?

Kevin said...

Good work, Mary Beth.

The media can have 53% of the country absolutely positive Biden voted for Thomas by dinnertime.

And you won't be able to prove to them otherwise.

Kevin said...

Seriously though, if the outcome of the Presidential election is decided by the Supreme Court, I hope the decision doesn’t follow party lines.

Me too.

9-0 Trump might shut some yaps.

Even for an afternoon.

Krumhorn said...

I’ll never forget the moment when during the hottest part of the hearing Biden sneered a soto voce threat to Arlen Specter that he would cut off his mic if he persisted a line of questioning. He hissed it like the snake that he is.

I don’t know why anyone would think for even an instant that their shitty treatment of someone in these hearings will just be bygones when something important comes up down the road. If there is one certain truth about politics, it is that grudges mean everything.

- Krumhorn

Narayanan said...

Amadeus 48 said...
Well, you know, Biden did lead a lynch party.

If I were that writer, I wouldn't be bringing up the treatment of Clarence Thomas by Joe Biden.
--------------=============
If I were that writer, and I brought up the treatment of Clarence Thomas by Joe Biden.
I would also be asking people not to vote for Smilin Joe Slimin

gilbar said...

wendybar said...
Maybe they should cancel Joe Biden instead. He seems to be the problem.

so, let's review

Jo Biden bragged about being So Corrupt, that he could brag about getting a prosecutor Fired, for investigating his family's corruption.
and when he Did that;
He said that NO ONE could do anything about, 'cause he was running for President

before that;

Jo Biden performed a 'high tech lynching', on an innocent black judge
and when he Did that;
He said THAT meant, that judge would need to recuse himself, from any and all Jo Biden cases

Must be NICE being Jo Biden! anything you do; comes back to hurt someone ELSE

wendybar said...

Joe called another lid for the day. He refuses to take a drug test. What is Biden Hiding?? You can't tell me that this incoherent man is going to suddenly become coherent and win a debate. Come on Man....You gotta know this stinks to high heavens.

Big Mike said...

@Godfather, don’t tell us. Tell Kagan and Breyer.

Unknown said...

Reminds me a bit of the Trump argument that a Mexican-American judge in some Trump case ought to recuse because Trump had been so harsh on immigration, so of course he’d be biased against him.

walter said...

In an Associated Press interview with Mark Sherman dated July 8, 2016, Justice Ginsburg, when asked for her views on a potential Donald Trump (R) administration, stated, "I don't want to think about that possibility, but if it should be, then everything is up for grabs ... It's likely that the next president, whoever she will be, will have a few appointments to make."[1]
Two days later, The New York Times published an interview between reporter Adam Liptak and Justice Ginsburg in which she offered the following comments on Trump, "I can’t imagine what this place would be — I can’t imagine what the country would be — with Donald Trump as our president ... For the country, it could be four years. For the court, it could be — I don’t even want to contemplate that."[2]

Kai Akker said...

If anything, this makes Thomas the 100% most qualified person to sit in judgment of any conflict surrounding Biden.

Todd said...



If it does, it won't. Roberts still wants to go to the fancy parties, actual law be damned...

n.n said...

how Barret must recuse herself in all abortion cases because of her religious fanaticism

Religious fanaticism: Pro-Choice, selective, opportunistic human rights, civil rights, and science.

Then there is Trump, Barrett, all-American, Pro-Life, liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness for "the People... and our Posterity".

n.n said...

The left are segregationists & racists.

Diversity and exclusion, past, present, and in progress.

Achilles said...

Jupiter said...

It certainly appears that the Democrats are planning to throw this one into the courts.

And to start a civil war when they lose.

We just have to make sure the people at the top get what they deserve.

It can't just be their dopes and pawns that pay.

Greg The Class Traitor said...

The Godfather said...
Seriously though, if the outcome of the Presidential election is decided by the Supreme Court, I hope the decision doesn’t follow party lines.

It's nice to hope that. But, while you can hope that the left wing "Justices" will decide that following the US Constitution, precedent, and laws (in that order) is a good idea, you're an idiot if you actually expect that to happen

n.n said...

Mike Sylwester said...

I think Biden voted to confirm Thomas.
9/28/20, 8:41 AM

He did not.


No, he didn't. Perhaps he thought that Thomas had a conflict of interest as a... what? American, and should refuse the nomination. We need more Liberal justices, Twilight Amendment (one is sufficient), and dictated Constitution.

boatbuilder said...

Should all of the justices who Biden voted to approve also recuse themselves? Or those who Biden voted against? Or those who Biden shepherded through the process? Or those who Biden (along with Obama) interviewed and supported for "installation?" How far does this go?

GingerBeer said...

Mike Sylwester/Yancey Ward: The Senate Judiciary Committee voted 13-1(Paul Simon D-IL was the No vote) to forward Thomas's nomination to the full Senate w/out a recommendation. A previous motion to forward with a recommendation failed 7-7. The Roll Call vote for confirmation of Clarence Thomas was 52-48, Biden voted Nay. The Ds held a 56-44 majority in the Senate at the time.

Sebastian said...

"we're all able to read that account and use it to judge Joe Biden."

Well, we're able, but no one, other than a half done nice women, cares.

Progs are fine with a white man abusing a black man if it's done for the right reasons, and we deplorables are completely cynical about prog motives and actions. Progs think Joe's judicial shenanigans count in his favor, we righties judged them long ago as evidence of his shallowness and bad character. Only a few nice women think any further reading is needed to "judge Joe."

Chris N said...

Not only do you have to be (B)lack, but you have to be(B)lacketty-(B)lack.

That's a lot to ask of anyone.

Imagine you're white, but you live in a small minority group, which is historically poor and genuinely oppressed in many cases. The pressures from the folks who look like your are enormous. Everyone you see is always signals your loyalty.

One of the best ways to help individuals to become themselves going forward, and unlock their potential, is to not focus obsessively on (R)ace, and to not grant the people in charge the power to obesses over (R)ace, ruining many lives.

And keep those woke assholes away from anything that works.

GingerBeer said...

Giovan Pietro Bellori /Michael K: RBG had no role at PP. She co-founded the ACLU's Women's Rights Project and spent several years litigating as general counsel before being nominated to the Federal bench by Jimmy Carter. She also was, like Elizabeth Warren, a law professor at Rutgers Law school.

roesch/voltaire said...

Thomas should like Biden who kept two other witnesses from testifying against him.

Jim at said...

I can't seem to find the WaPo link demanding Elena Kagan recuse herself during the Obamacare case. You know, the same Obamacare she argued when she was Solicitor General?

Any help?

gerry said...

What goes around comes around, eh? Sweet.

Aggie said...

Hmm - But if the election goes to the Supreme Court, Justice Thomas shouldn't be the one recusing himself. It would, however, be a terrific way for Joe Biden to make amends.

Tina Trent said...

Now would be a good time to revisit Ted Kennedy's behavior on Senate Judy demanding that nobody DARE question Anita Hill's version of events. The fact that he didn't burst into flames suggests The Exorcist was in fact only fiction. Or, the devil takes long weekends.

Nobody asked him to recuse himself, of course. Kennedy, I mean.

The videos are easy to find: they're just hard to swallow.

Tina Trent said...

I'd like to see Kagan recuse herself on every case involving the violation or murder of women. She's the evil hag who handed Bill Clinton and Eric Holder the legal justification for excluding serial killers of women from hate crime charges by suggesting a sliding scale of "hatiness" needed to torture mere women to death, as opposed to torture-killing other types of people.

Leora said...

I already wasn't going to ever vote for Biden for anything ever because of the Thomas hearings. I was a registered Democrat then and had never voted for a Republican.

I love how there are always new explanations of why conservatives should just give up their power because it might be used.

Bilwick said...

Not only the only African American, but probably the only consistent pro-liberty justice on the court. Uppity [fill in your favorite racial epithet here]. . . . Somebody get a rope!

Unknown said...

Once upon a time, a county commission refused to increase the county's supplements it paid to the state judges sitting on the bench in that circuit. The judges were not amused.

A few weeks later, the county commissioners noticed that the judges were no longer issuing any fines for crimes, but rather, were sending everyone to jail at the county commission's expense.

The county commissioners figured out that they could not short-change the ones in the robes, though the financial power was and is in the hands of the commission.

It might be poetic justice if Biden-Harris ticket must plead with the judges they have trashed for any reason.

Drago said...

roesch/voltaire: "Thomas should like Biden who kept two other witnesses from testifying against him."

LOL

Yes indeed, there were lots of Avenatti's and CBF-like liars around even then.

I'll bet the FBI got 5,000 callers claiming to have been sexually assaulted by Thomas just like the FBI reported there were 5,000 callers claiming to have been raped by Kavanaugh.

And I'll bet r/v believes every single one of them.

No doubt about it, r/v is pulling away from readering in the Most Inga-like Poster At Althouse.

In fact, if this keeps up, I might have to break into Dandy Don singing "Turn Out The Lights, The Party's Over" soon.

n.n said...

Uppity [fill in your favorite racial epithet here]. . . . Somebody get a rope!

Or a tire.

hstad said...

Joe Biden won't have to worry about Justice Thomas' grudge against him. But if by a miracle "Joe Biden" wins in November - hey Joe, life's a bitch and you'll(deserve) get your 'karma' from Justice Thomas.

gahrie said...

Thomas should like Biden who kept two other witnesses from testifying against him.

If there was any credibility to them, they would have written their books and made their movies long ago. Do you think the media wouldn't jump at the chance to take Justice Thomas down, even today?

mikee said...

Godfather and Greg: regarding the Court voting on party lines:
The Heller v DC case about gun control was a wonderfully limited test case, years in the making, to determine solely if the 2nd Amendment protected an individual right to keep and bear arms, limited to the federal preserve of DC itself. The Court voted 9-0 that the 2nd protected an individual right to keep arms. The Court then voted 5-4 that total bans on classes of commonly used firearms were unconstitutional in DC. Four justices contorted reality from "OF COURSE there is an individual right to keep and bear arms!" to "Go fuck yourselves, peasants. No guns for you!" Guess the party.

There are rights that emanate from penumbras, and enumerated rights plainly stated in the Bill of Rights. Guess which ones get better treatment from the left.

Clyde said...

Don't want people to possibly carry a grudge against you? Then don't act like a total dick.

Amadeus 48 said...

Mike Sylvester at 8:41--Someone may have covered this above, but Biden voted No on confirmation of Thomas. He also voted No in the Judiciary Committee on sending the nomination to the floor with a positive recommendation. He voted Yes as part of a 13-1 vote on the Judiciary Committee to send the nomination to the floor without recommendation. The sanctimonious Paul Simon was the sole No vote in the committee to move the nomination to the floor.

Eleven Demmies voted to confirm Thomas, including Al "the Pal" Dixon of Illinois. It cost him his Senate seat. The only Republican to vote No was Jim Jeffords. I had forgotten how lopsided the Senate was in 1990. 58 Demmies and 42 GOPers. Bill Clinton moved the South to the GOP.

Amadeus 48 said...

Fortunately, Justice Thomas gets to decide when to recuse himself. Peaches Pelosi will talk up impeachment, no doubt.

SAGOLDIE said...

"I think Biden voted to confirm Thomas."

Nope, nope, nope. Final tally: 52 yeas; 48 nays.

Yeas: 31R's + 11D's
Nays: 48D's

The 11 Yea D's:
Boren
Breaux
DeConcini
Dixon
Exon
Fowler
Hollings
Johnston
Nunn
Robb
Shelby

NYC JournoList said...

Didn’t Joe Biden hire Kagan for a job on his Senate committee in 1993? She is literally one of his henchmen.

Terry Ott said...

NYC JournoList: Kagan, a “henchman"? Not sure if it should be “henchperson” or maybe “henchthey”. As I grow older, it’s SO hard to keep up with the authorized word usage. Doesn’t matter. It will change again pretty soon.

Sam L. said...

The Lefties, they be UGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGLY!!!!!

Kirk Parker said...

Gahrie @ 9:04am,

No doubt, but I certainly don't need a movie in order to find Justice Thomas's life inspirational!

gadfly said...

So - if Justice Thomas must withdraw from any election question - why not Trump-appointed Justices Gorsuch an Kavanagh? And while we are at it, let's add Alito and Chief Justice Roberts and for that matter, newby Amy Barrett who were all supported by the so-called conservative Federalist Society and its dark money source, the Judicial Crisis Network?

Not to worry about a lack of quorum, since the landslide Biden win will keep SCOTUS out of the picture.