Said Harlan Crow, quoted in "Harlan Crow: There’s nothing wrong with my friendship with Clarence Thomas/The 73-year-old real estate magnate, who is widely known as a pillar of Dallas business, finds himself in a maelstrom that was unimaginable to him two weeks ago" (Dallas Morning News).
“A lot of people that have opinions about this seem to think that there’s something wrong with this friendship. You know, it’s possible that people are just really friends. It blows my mind that people assume that because Clarence Thomas has friends, that those friends have an angle.”...
“You know, I can’t talk to Clarence without him asking all about the kids. ‘What are they doing?’ We have a dog named Otis that Clarence particularly likes. We talk about dogs a lot.” Crow remembered Thomas supporting his son’s wrestling team at St. Mark’s School of Texas. “Friends do stuff like that.”...
“Every single relationship — a baby’s relationship to his mom — has some kind of reciprocity,“ he said....
Crow is asked why he bought Thomas’ mother’s house:
ProPublica reported that Crow bought a single-story home and two vacant lots down the road for $133,363 from three co-owners — Thomas, his mother and the family of Thomas’ late brother.
“I assumed his mother owned the home,” Crow said. “His life story is an amazing American life story: born into deep poverty. Father gone. Mother — the lady whom we’re talking about — really not able to do a lot to help raise her two sons. Ultimately raised by his grandparents, who were illiterate. Growing up in Jim Crow Georgia. So I approached him with the idea that I might purchase that home for the purpose that in due course it could be the boyhood home of a great American.” The thought that it was more than that “kind of drives me crazy.”
As for the improvements? “She works as a greeter in the local hospital — a 94-year-old lady,” Crow said. “When we made this purchase, she was just an 84-year-old lady, or something like that. I built a carport, so that she can park her car. It’s not an enclosed garage. That’s what I did. Now, you said improvements to the house. I don’t remember any other rooms. However, if there was a commode that was terrible, I might have fixed it. I don’t know.”...
Crow expresses a desire to be understood in terms of his love for America:
“I think America is one of the greatest things that’s happened in world history. Here we are governing ourselves, or trying to govern ourselves,” Crow said. “There are other times in world history in which that’s happened, but nothing like this. I love the American experiment in self-governance....
“I decided that I like American historical manuscripts and books that relate to American history.... It’s a big collection. But it’s many thousands of documents, and books.... We have a small number of things here that are about bad guys.... You can’t have a library and talk about that without including the bad.... We’ve got Jesse James and Al Capone and Lee Harvey Oswald and John Wilkes Booth... So yeah, World War II was a fairly big event in American history. We have a bunch of stuff about World War II, including some of our enemies."...
“It really, really bothers me that — what I’m going to call yellow journalism — has decided to say that I like some of that stuff. That’s exactly the opposite of what the truth is.... My mom was on a ship that was sunk by Germans during World War II. If you try to kill my mom, I don’t like you. I mean, that’s reasonably obvious. And so the idea that I could have sympathy for Nazism is insane.”...
पोस्ट्स
७९ टिप्पण्या:
The corrupt white left will not allow a black man to be friends with a rich man.
Only Rich white leftists are allowed riches.
Got that?
Leftists always have a target for their current hate campaign. Even when no rules are broken they make up smears and innuendo to pile on. Has there been any article comparing Thomas’s activities to the other eight members of the high court in Pro Publica? No. Context doesn’t matter when Alinskey rules are in play.
"Propaganda must not serve the truth, especially as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent."
- Adolf Hitler (Mein Kampf)
This ProPublica group sounds familiar. Do they wear brown shirts and armbands?
Thank you Dallas Morning News for giving us the rest of the story.
The central issue is: Did Crowe pay lots more for the house than the market? Sure doesn't look like it.
When former US Senator Bob Kerrey moved back to Omaha from NYC to run for Senate, he bought a house in the Dundee/Memorial Park area of Omaha. He'd lived in that neighborhood before. Bob is a rich guy. He owned a chain of fast-food places and gyms.
After he lost his race, he sold the house to Susie Buffett for a big profit. He didn't need to do that as that's a popular part of Omaha. I think Susie then sold it for a loss. Not a peep in the Omaha media.
Now, that's a scandal.
Liberals are so, so dishonest.
A coordinated political hit job. I agree.
He sounds like a good friend and a curious, thoughtful companion.
Any time the press wants to dig into *every Justice and the entire Congress to check their suspicious financial gains, go ahead.
Go Harlan!
Of course it is a political hit job, everything published by the msm is a political hit job, the degree is the only thing in question.
it is a beautiful friendship
= bromance
James Taranto in this morning's WSJ ...
The Truth About Clarence Thomas’s Disclosures
He reported carefully on his inherited real estate. ProPublica’s reporting was slipshod and incurious.
WSJ
Coverage as always is exasperating. Thomas presumably should have declared lavish or life-changing gifts. Not exactly driving a Winnebago around small-town America. If there was a case on which a benefactor expressed strong views, Thomas probably should have recused himself. All the Ginny stuff, other bookkeeping, is bullshit.
Coverage as always is exasperating. Thomas presumably should have declared lavish or life-changing gifts. Not exactly driving a Winnebago around small-town America. If there was a case on which a benefactor expressed strong views, Thomas probably should have recused himself. All the Ginny stuff, other bookkeeping, is bullshit.
Which is the stranger hobby for a Texas guy who inherits billions, Nazi memorabilia or extreme right political activist families with seat on USSC?
Thanks for this post, Alhouse. It is a public service.
After finishing his statement, he dried his eyes with Hitler’s hankie.
I don't know if Justice Thomas has done anything wrong. What I do know is that Democrats don't care about wrongdoing in public office. When they complain about it there is ALWAYS an ulterior motive.
Because the Left controls the microphone, people on the center-right have to answer their bad-faith attacks with facts and a resonable response. If Fox News had found a similar case with a left-wing judge, the Leftwing Billionaire would tell fox news to fuck off.
WHat evidence is there that this billionaire (1) had business that came befoe the SCOTUS or (2) that Thomas ruled in his favor?
None. So who cares if he's Thomas' friend? And who cares if he bought his mother a house?
The leftwing also work in a different way. Leftist judges get lucrative book deals. Their families and friends get jobs in Leftwing NGOs and they get enourmous speaking fees at Corporations and COlleges. All of that is legal bribery.
Diversity is Inequity, Exclusion or DIEversity.
Redistributive change or trickle-down economics at the democratic/dictatorial's pleasure.
Environmental zealotry.
Ethnic Springs without borders.
Dreams of herr Mengele's clinics.
Abortion of lives deemed unworthy of lives.
A Capitol Hill fire.
A secular, ethical religion.
At least he didn't do the standard : "I hate Nazis more than anymore, and cry about the Holocaust every day" shtick.
He brought it back to his mother. Which was funny.
"It blows my mind that people assume that because Clarence Thomas has friends, that those friends have an angle.”
Maybe those making the assumption don't have any relationships that don't include an angle.
They are trying to get rid of Justice Thomas, one way or another. The alleged conflict of interest was essentially rejected by Circuit Court judges last week. A comment was that judges are allowed to have friends, and staying with their good friends is just fine, as long as they don’t have matters before you, as a judge.
That’s nothing new. My mother was good friends with the wives of two district court judges in CO. One was in band in HS with my father, as I was with one of his boys. The three women were in a hiking/cross country skiing group. So I found myself in a cabin with both judges waiting out a rain, right after LS graduation. I would often attend 1st JD Bar lunches, and the second one would come sit with me. We would be surrounded by fawning attorneys, and what he wanted to do was pump me about being a patent attorney. In any case, he was the judge in my divorce case. I disclosed it, and the other side waived the potential conflict. They knew it would settle out of court, and it did. As a side note, both of them were Democrats, and my father and I were Republicans, but had all graduated from the same LS. And my father was before both of them routinely without any issues, even though my parents occasionally traveled with the older one and his wife, and my brother would house sit for them.
I see two reasons why Justice Thomas is so reviled but the left. First, he is off the reservation. He is a very conservative Black, who by dint of a lot of hard work made it to the absolute to of the legal field. He adamantly opposes Affirmative Action, believing it bad for Blacks and for the country. Democrats have built much of their power by championing it, esp for Blacks, blatantly trading preferences for votes.
The other is that Thomas was always the bigger philosophical foe to the left than was Justice Scalia. The latter often seemed to count angels on the heads of pins, and split legal hairs. This often allowed leftist lawyers and judges to maneuver around his decisions. Thomas, on the other hand, writes forefully, with a broad brush. He seems to love bright line decisions.
One example of this is found in their 2nd Amdt cases. Scalia, in the Heller decision, essentially determined that the DC law in question had been reviewed under rational basis analysis, giving deference to the government. He talked about self defense being an enumerated right, and that they are reviewed under either Intermediate or Strict Scrutiny. But since it didn’t come close to either, he would just say that the proper level of analysis was increased scrutiny. That was the hole that ate the opinion. Liberal Circuits read that to mean that anything a smidgen above Rational Basis was sufficient, allowing interest balancing, most often finding the state’s interest in gun control was more important, while conservative Circuits read Heller to mean either Intermediate or Strict scrutiny was required, and proceeded to develop a methodology for which was appropriate for any given case. Thomas, last year, in his Bruen decision, essentially ended the debate. The interest balancing in the smidgen above Rational Basis scrutiny was idiotic. The Right To Keep And Bear Arms is a fundamental enumerated right. That means Strict Scrutiny. The government (federal or state) must find a (real) compelling state interest, and also that it was narrowly tailored to address that compelling state interest. The law sweeping too broadly was fatal to their case, because it wasn’t narrowly tailored. That was bad enough. But he went on to require that any laws (etc) being defended must find historical legal analogues, but that anything after about the time of the adoption of the 2nd and 14th (for the states) Amendments didn’t count. So, post Reconstruction Jim Crow laws disarming Blacks were no help for gun control. Nor were the laws during the 1930s attacking mobs and their machine guns. Etc. He painted a bright line, that later Courts are going to have a very hard time distinguishing around, and a strict reversal is unlikely, even with a very liberal court, because of the obvious threat of an armed insurrection. To reverse, would have to show why Bruen was wrong, and won’t be able to to the many gun owners in this country.
Making Justice Thomas even more dangerous, to the left, right now, is that he is the Senior Justice. If he can get 5 votes, he can opt to write a decision, unless CJ Roberts preempts him. If he can’t get 5 votes, that means that Roberts is very likely on the other side, and he can write the Dissent, if he wants to. And his broad brush, powerful, style, that means that even in dissent, he will be widely cited in the future.
The libs play for keeps, while the conservatives are, 'My good friends across the aisle...'
It's why they win...
One of the very most liberal journalists* I happen to know semi-personally comments on the Harlon Crow story:
https://www.facebook.com/jim.schutze/posts/pfbid05cvFgmchsjN4xpoXhDrYAcSXNE3b6SPFT3Dob8iXfMvNfQBmXgxUJvYkje1Hw8iyl
* Like Molly Ivins. This is a guy that still thinks Dan Rather's story about the GW Bush Air National Guard documents was well researched, and any errors simply bad luck. Journalism, like life, is a mixed bag and it takes all kinds...
Good for him. I can't wait to visit the Clarence Thomas boyhood home museum.
If Dominion has a case against FoxNews, seems like Crow has a case against… Pro-yellow Journalism.
Clarence Thomas has been personally attacked for the better part of the last 33 years. Trying to think of a similar case of someone (non-politician) on the left being attacked in the press, non-stop for such a long period of time.
I think the issue about the vacations is interesting. If I go to a friend's house and they serve me lunch, I think most of us will say that's not a bribe. If my friend is a zillionaire and he flies me to his private island and spends a million dollars on me, it sounds a lot worse.
But you know, I'm not taking that million dollars home with me. I can only eat so many pieces of chicken while I'm there. He may be spending a million dollars, but I _may_ be doing it because I like spending time with my friend.
I'm not saying that a million-dollar vacation can't be a bribe. I just don't see it as automatically a bribe.
Barack Obama and Tony Rezko clink their champagne glasses and laugh.
That is, if Rezko is out of prison.
The left is completely unprincipled.
We know all about this guy, but not Epstein's or Maxwell's client list.
$133,363 for 2 lots and a home? Seems like Thomas was giving his friend a good deal. Who is supposedly buying who's influence here? Who is getting the favors? Does anyone else have a deal like this? 3 times that money might get you a home on one lot in Bastrop, TX.
"It blows my mind that people assume"
A little naive. "People" don't just "assume." Progs actively seek out and attack their targets.
"The thought that it was more than that “kind of drives me crazy.”
Again, a little naive. Progs will use and exploit anything. Saying it drives you crazy only encourages their bloodlust.
"Crow expresses a desire to be understood in terms of his love for America"
Still more reason for progs to target him.
"And so the idea that I could have sympathy for Nazism is insane.”
Yeah, yeah. I get his indignation But the naivete of non-progs has to end. Learn your lesson: progs will go after you for any reason at any time by any means necessary. Apologizing or waxing indignant or acting hurt doesn't do you any good. Stand up and resist--as Crowe is also doing, to his credit.
They can shag on Harlan Crow all day (and the Dallas Morning News will do it, if it sells another click) but he's done quite a bit of good in Dallas. When he passes, there will be enough material for several museums. He already has one, the Museum of Asian Art downtown right next door to the Dallas Museum of Art.
https://crowcollection.org/
Has this man never had a case before the US Supreme Court, and if so did Justice Thomas recuse himself?
If the man’s never had a case before the Supreme Court then what difference does it make?
This entire thing is 100% bullshit, it’s 100% an attack on Justice Thomas because they don’t like him.
He gets to be friends with rich people if he wants to, that’s not unlawful. And it’s not a problem being a judge if you have rich people for friends. Lots of judges have rich people for friends. They went to law school with smart people who probably made more money than they did, for one thing.
Does he follow Declaration in spirit and Constitutional black letter?
As for his friend, judge him by the principles of his character, not the color of labels alleged.
WI just elected a drunk elder spouse abusing, N-word slinging lib to its SCOTUS via millions from out of state "donors". More dirt on her and she isn't seated yet.
Clarence Thomas has been under constant racist attacks and lies from liberals and Democrats since his confirmation hearings.
He is a conservative African American. Therefore he is worse than a white man in the eyes of his racist haters.
The attacks on Thomas are battle space prep for the affirmative action decision coming. The Democrats hate having a conservative black man on the Court. Janice Rogers Brown would have been another conservative on the Court but Democrats filibustered her nomination to keep the Republicans from nominating the first black woman to the Supreme Court. Instead we now have a black woman who doesn't know what a woman is.
MayBee said...
Barack Obama and Tony Rezko clink their champagne glasses and laugh.
That is, if Rezko is out of prison.
4/17/23, 10:58 AM
Ding, ding ding!! THREAD winner. The Great divider did no wrong in the eyes of the corrupt progressives that served him.
A creative and determined prosecutor could manufacture a criminal charge from these details and indict Justice Thomas on multiple counts subject to prison terms. Money changed hands; a law may or may not have been broken; this needs to be adjudicated without fear or favor. Let a jury decide.
And the first step would be to charge Crow. Lock him up and see if he talks.
There's a precedent.
"Has there been any article comparing Thomas’s activities to the other eight members of the high court in Pro Publica? No"
Is it too late to perform a forensic accounting of RGB? Not to say she violated any rules, rather, for the laughs?
"Instead we now have a black woman who doesn't know what a woman is."
Do any of us? Do women themselves? Doubtful.
Leland said...
"$133,363 for 2 lots and a home? Seems like Thomas was giving his friend a good deal. Who is supposedly buying who's influence here? Who is getting the favors? Does anyone else have a deal like this? 3 times that money might get you a home on one lot in Bastrop, TX."
I just did a couple of quick real estate searches for Liberty Cty, GA. Liberty is a long skinny county just south of Savannah that runs from the coast deep inland. Closer to the coast, there appears to be a number of new-build luxury housing asking $800k or more. However, looking further inland, there are quite a few empty lots for sale in the $20k - $40k range. They ranged in size from .46ac up to multiple acres. One that caught my eye was 16.86 acres that they were asking $40k for. There were no utilities, although 3-phase electric was available (presumably at the street).
We don't know the details of the 3 properties that would determine market price. Nor do we know when the properties were sold - although some of the quoted sections imply they were sold about 10-12 years ago.
So 3 properties of unknown size - and only one with a house - sold for $133k a decade ago in a rural location? Without knowing any details, it seems reasonable. I suspect that if one side got the better of the deal, it was not by much.
And today an insurrection is happening in New York City where protesters are creating chaos during the Republican hearing on the Corrupt DA Alvin Bragg. Funny, how it is okay when the left insurrects. They aren't there taking selfies.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11981517/Protesters-calling-Republicans-traitors-try-crash-hearing-New-York-crime-victims.html
The Truth About Clarence Thomas’s Disclosures
The comment section for this article basically boils down to, "Yeah, yeah, whatever. But he's still Clarence Thomas, so bite me."
I don't remember the media hoopla when it came out that Barack Obama's home in the haute Hyde Park neighborhood of Chicago was 'arranged' by Anythony Rezko. Rezko managed to get Obama a lot he could not afford, and...Rezko bought the adjoining lot- which was necessary to get Obama's lot (Rezko put that adjoining lot in his wife's name). All just 'friends' doing things for friends. Oh...and somehow, Obama got his house for $300,000 under asking price. And while this was going on, Tony Rezko was under investigation by the Feds and had already been indicted on corruption charges. Yet...he still managed to get Obama his home, his lot, and a sweet mortgage with barely a whisper from the national media.
I don't recall ProPublica's hard hitting article on this (or NBC). It's one thing to have a good friend who has money and you see him or allow him to be a part of your life. It's another to have a known political fixer in Chicago who was not a close friend, or even a long time acquaintance, arrange your new home, lot, mortgage while he's been indicted for corruption.
The selective outrage machine continues on.
Althouse, when you criticized the reporting on Harlan Crow as some sort of crypto-Nazi, I agreed with you.
I had read about the personal favors and hospitality shown to Thomas by Crow (trips, private jets, yachts, Adirondack lodges) and while inexplicably excessive, it didn't impress me as any clear ethical violation.
And as Harlan Crow describes his plans for a future "Clarence Thomas Boyhood Home" memorial, I think I understand his perspective and again I am not convinced it is an ethical violation apart from perhaps a reporting failure.
But I continue to ask you and ask any of the Thomas-defending, media-haterz from the Trumpian right: What is your answer to the Ginni Thomas election-conspiracy communications? How do you resolve the fact that Harlan Crow has been sitting as a Board Chairman of AEI while AEI files amicus briefs in cases that Thomas is hearing?
Those are the harder questions. I've never been a Thomas-hater; but I don't have any good answers to those questions and I've never seen any plausible good answers.
And really; what has Politico gotten wrong in the reporting that Harlan Crow is criticizing? Politico is asking some very good questions, such that even if Thomas is not guilty of judicial misconduct or impeachable offenses, they are questions that have a major bearing on the ethical comportment of the justices, the operation of the Court, and the public perception of, and confidence in, the Court.
Michael K: "The attacks on Thomas are battle space prep for the affirmative action decision coming. The Democrats hate having a conservative black man on the Court."
The Democrats/lefties/LLR-democraticals (but I repeat myself) hate having a conservative black man on the Court.
FIFY
"Instead we now have a black woman who doesn't know what a woman is."
Do any of us? Do women themselves? Doubtful.
An adult human born with a vagina.
wendybar said...
"MayBee said...
Barack Obama and Tony Rezko clink their champagne glasses and laugh.
That is, if Rezko is out of prison."
Tony Rezko was released in 2015. having served 4 years of his 10 1/2 year sentence.
Not a fair comparison since Rezko was and still is a notorious Chicago fixer. There is no evidence that Justice Thomas's friend does anything for political advantage.
I don't think the ProPublica hit-piece was seriously meant to dislodge Thomas from the supreme court. This is not to say that they wouldn't have been happy if it somehow happened, but they couldn't possibly think this would lead to Justice Thomas being removed from the bench.
No. It's all about narrative and aimed at the partisan left. It accomplishes two goals: It distracts from the continuing failed presidency of Joe Biden and gives hope that there will be some kind of win for the left.
ProPublica = AntiAmerica
I had forgotten all about Tony Rezko and Obama. Now, that was corrupt.
I am reminded of these lines from A Man For All Seasons:
Cromwell: I have evidence that Sir Thomas, while he was a judge, accepted bribes.
The Duke of Norfolk: What? Goddammit, he was the only judge since Cato who didn't accept bribes! When was there last a Chancellor whose possessions after three years in office totaled one hundred pounds and a gold chain?
Let them spew their bullshit. At the end of the day, Thomas will still be sitting on the Court.
And there's not a damn thing they can do about it.
It's just me but I link this post to a previous post in which you referenced the Commerce Clause (CC). In my simple understanding, Congress could declare anything they want under the CC, pass legislation, maybe even get it signed by POTUS and then dare the Supreme Court (SC) to step-in and find the legislation unconstitutional. I believe that has happened over time. But if the SC shifts decidedly "left" the possibility exists that the Commerce Clause could be weaponized completely to allow the Left to do nearly anything they want. All under "The Law". If that were to occur then the result would be similar to what is happening in Brazil. A corrupt government allied with a corrupt Judiciary doing whatever the oligarchs want done.
Chuck
Among other things Politico conflates two very different counties in their hit job thus giving the impression that a non earning property in a depressed county is the same as a property of value near Savannah. There is an excellent article in todays WSJ detailing the many things they got wrong. They were incurious
"Further, the ProPublica troika made a sloppy reporting error, the effect of which is to cast Justice Thomas’s disclosures in a falsely unfavorable light—to make them look shambolic or perhaps even dishonest when in fact they followed the filing instructions without fail.
The reporters’ error involves a confusion about what Justice Thomas did disclose. “By the early 2000s,” ProPublica reports, “he had stopped listing specific addresses of property he owned in his disclosures. But he continued to report holding a one-third interest in what he described as ‘rental property at ## 1, 2, & 3’ in Savannah.” It’s worth noting—ProPublica doesn’t—that the filing instructions (on page 32) prescribe disclosing rental properties in precisely this manner."
The Truth About Clarence Thomas’s Disclosures - WSJ
Owing to his poor upbringing and his achievements as a black American, Clarence Thomas's likeness should be carved on Mt. Rushmore. Just watching the "peaceful" protests would be hoot.
Blogger Jim at said...
Let them spew their bullshit. At the end of the day, Thomas will still be sitting on the Court.
And there's not a damn thing they can do about it.
Fact check: True!
There is a zero-point-zero chance that Justice Thomas, or President Biden for that matter, will be removed via impeachment in this Congress.
But these things do get weaponized as electoral issues. Trump did it successfully in 2016; appealing to conservative FedSoc types like me who reviled him through the primaries. He promised us judges. We held our noses and voted for him. And now, we will see how Trump’s thing with judges (Thomas, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, Barrett, Dobbs, Kacsmaryk) will work for him in 2024.
Even Trump himself (?!) knows what shitty retail politics it is, given the post-Dobbs reaction of the ultraconservatives in backwater jurisdictions all over, trying to ban abortion outright.
How many times did Bill and Hillary Clinton visit Epstein's Island? Was their stay there gratis, or did they pay? As Jeffery Epstein's guest: What did they receive, one wonders.
The coverage on NPR has expanded to include 'questionable' activities by Clarence Thomas' wife as well. How dare they have a social life! How dare she engage in social causes she believes in (that we dislike)!
True to form.
The Left will NEVER get over the fact that Thomas wouldn't resign after the high-tech lynching that failed.
They tried the same stunt on Kavanaugh and that didn't work either.
Uncle Joe sold his house to a donor from MBNA ... All is fine as long as it is not a friend.
https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/politics/joe-biden/2020/10/20/analysis-how-biden-made-large-profit-sale-his-house-2008-archive-article/5996458002/
I had read about the personal favors and hospitality shown to Thomas by Crow (trips, private jets, yachts, Adirondack lodges) and while inexplicably excessive, it didn't impress me as any clear ethical violation.
Well, good, because as a person with friends who are better off than I, I wonder how they and we are supposed to socialize if they're not allowed to invite us to what they own, contribute to, or patronize - if the arrow can only go one way. That is, if we have friends with a lake house but our weekend house is the one we also use during the week, can we invite them to our house but they can't invite us to theirs? If they have a suite at the ballpark and we have space on our sofa to watch games, can we have them over to watch in our living room but they can't invite us to their suite? That would seem silly.
As for Ginny Thomas's supposed election "denial" entanglements, any cases before the Supreme Court that I don't know about? Seems to me every election allegation was brought before lower courts, which in almost every case dismissed then on procedural grounds. And those few that were heard failed and haven't been appealed. Am I mistaken? If I'm not, then where is the conflict?
Gahrie is defining "woman" as "adult human born with a vagina." Just to cover edge cases, I'd go with "adult human born with two X chromosomes" - perhaps there are a handful of XX humans who were unfortunate enough to be born without, or without complete, genitalia.
Aside from that quibble, I don't know of any other biological standard that needs to be applied. In all this transteria, I have yet to hear any biological information that negates the XX thing - just edge-case discussions of the tiny minority of actual intersex people, who - in my opinion - may call themselves whatever they like, and God be with them.
I can remember several scandals involving lib Justices, but the coverage was belated and muted. Maybe Fortas was the exception. Iirc, Frankfurter met frequently with FDR at the same time he served as a Supreme. He served more as an advocate for FDR's policies than as a Supreme Court Justice. News of this was reported many years after Frankfurter's death, but it was widely known in Washington circles....I remember reading that Douglas was patently senile and had to be heavily leaned on to leave the bench. Here again news of his cognitive decline and of the efforts needed to get him off the bench were not reported at the time.....
The only thing that gives this news story legs is that Mr. Crow first met Justice Thomas in the mid-1990s, a few years after his October 1991 confirmation to the court. When a billionaire with ties to the American Enterprise Institute (a conservative foundation which I financially support) decides to make friends with Thomas ONLY after he is seated on the Supreme Court, it at the very least has the appearance of impropriety. Absence this fact, this whole story would be dismissed out of hand.
Chuck again:
But I continue to ask you and ask any of the Thomas-defending, media-haterz from the Trumpian right: What is your answer to the Ginni Thomas election-conspiracy communications? How do you resolve the fact that Harlan Crow has been sitting as a Board Chairman of AEI while AEI files amicus briefs in cases that Thomas is hearing?
When did you leave the Republican Party, if indeed you were ever a member? Trump has nothing to do with Thomas. Ginni Thomas has the same rights you do, although she is not as annoying. AEI is a nonprofit conservative outfit. I guess that offends you Democrats.
Oh, were you talking about the house down the block from Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn? Who Barack didn't know, but Ayers' father employed? The Barack who launched his campaign from Ayers' living room? Nothing to see there! And the NYT said so!
Looks like LLR-democratical Chuck and his sidekick lonejustice are running the "inside-outside" game again.
Let's see what comes next.
lonejustice: "The only thing that gives this news story legs..."
This story has no legs.
LLR-democratical and Violent Homosexual Rage Rape Fantasist Chuck: "What is your answer to the Ginni Thomas election-conspiracy communications? How do you resolve the fact that Harlan Crow has been sitting as a Board Chairman of AEI while AEI files amicus briefs in cases that Thomas is hearing?"
These "charges" have all been addressed ad nauseum and shown to be non-issues except for you lefties who want to scream bloody murder about another conservative black man.
You two are going to need to start upping your "inside-outside" game if you really want to have an effect.
Chuck says "How do you resolve the fact that Harlan Crow has been sitting as a Board Chairman of AEI while AEI files amicus briefs in cases that Thomas is hearing?"
Filing an amicus brief is like picking up the phone and calling your Senator's office to tell him your opinion on a bill currently being considered by the legislature. I don't know why any judge at any level should feel conflicted by having a relationship with an amicus curiae who is not a party to a suit. This goes to the heart of the First Amendment guarantee of free speech and the right to petition for redress of grievances.
How many leftist organizations and individuals who worked with Ruth Bader Ginsburg filed amicus briefs when she was on the Court? How many elicited a recusal? None. In fact she heard and ruled on Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union and Reno v. ACLU, despite having served as the ACLU's General Counsel. She not only drew a salary from the organization before her appointment, but continued to collect speaking fees from it while she was a Justice.
Racists say negro cannot possibly have a white best friend.
Hassayamper:
I think that if it had been a single amicus brief, and if the situation had been such that Thomas and Crow were merely friends and ideologically kindred spirits, AND if Thomas had duly reported his many rather spectacular kindnesses from Crow, there might not be an issue worth discussing.
But Crow is a huge big shot with AEI.
And AEI is a regular amicus participant at SCOTUS.
And the involvement of Crow and Thomas was unusual, to say the least.
And Thomas seems to have pushed every envelope on allowable non-reporting.
I am going to assume, for your benefit and for the sake of argument, that what your stated about Ginsburg was accurate. I do know about her past ACLU representation/employment. (After which she had been a federal judge for years.) I don’t know about any speaking fees or similar engagements but if you know about them I presume that it is because they were payments proportional to the work in preparing and delivering the speeches; and that you know about them because Justice Ginsburg duly reported them.
As such, you can see how she would be distinguishable from Thomas. I wouldn’t have a problem with Thomas being paid for speeches to AEI, and reporting the income. Moreover, I have been pretty careful and circumspect about making any definitive claims of illegality on Thomas’ part.
It sounds like the best you’ve got is, “Well, what about Ginsburg?” So yeah; what about Ginsburg?
Practically every federal judge I’ve known (perhaps 20 of them, personally — most especially District Court Judges who are almost always plucked out of deep long standing legal careers in the federal district which they serve — have had to deal with potential conflicts regarding former law firms, clients, etc. There are clear rules and time frames in which such conflicts are considered. Ginsburg had no such relational conflicts with the ACLU by the time she got to SCOTUS.
I'd go with "adult human born with two X chromosomes"
=========
can you define born? adult? etc.
So 3 properties of unknown size - and only one with a house - sold for $133k a decade ago in a rural location? Without knowing any details, it seems reasonable. I suspect that if one side got the better of the deal, it was not by much.
==========
I also read that Thomas-mere lives rent-free on property
GOP megadonor Harlan Crow isn't charging Clarence Thomas' mother rent. Zillow estimates suggest that would have saved her $155,000 since 2014.
solution >> can mom adopt Harlan?
Here’s a position on Thomas that I can endorse:
https://www.thebulwark.com/is-clarence-thomas-crooked/?itm_source=parsely-api
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा