Clarence Thomas’s bizarre claim that he failed to disclose the lavish gifts he received from Republican megadonor Harlan Crow because he didn’t believe he had to brought me back to a day 30 years ago when Bill Gates asked me to lunch.
Roberts should have already publicly asked Clarence for his resignation; started writing a serious code of ethics that even a Supreme Court Justice can understand; and demand reviews by all remaining Justices for strict ethical compliance.
I won’t be holding my breath. Not too optimistic about Garland, either.
Nancy, I am boggled that there are restaurants that serve lunches they charge over $50.00 for and that there are lots of folks willing to pay for those lunches. I can't help wondering how many of those lunches our SC justices have eaten and if any of them was told to pay the inviter back afterwards.
It depends on where you live. In D.C. that is not unusual. It is an expensive place to live and work. That is why most people do not live there, they live in Virginia or Maryland. Cities in California even more so.
You will never convince me any more that Roberts didn’t know about what was going on with Thomas and his traitorous wife. The Chief Justice has been the judicial whore too long not to have heard anything about any of the foibles of the others of his ilk. It’s a good thing the hem of his robe is already black.
SPW, well-said. The knowledge of what Thomas was up to as well as his wife's "work" has to have been known by Roberts, but how does a guy playing in the same pool stop the others swimming there too? Each one of the "conservative" justices was carefully chosen for their willingness to behave badly and cover it up with feigned ignorance and lies, and those Conservative Justices are all really good at it, just check out their hearings and the decisions they have issued from the bench. They are not stellar, barely adequate justices, and proud of it.
Neil ,be serious. Even though I think chief justice, John Roberts has half a brain he isn’t about to remove tokenClarence Thomas. That would create an opening that Biden could fill. And no chinless McConnell could stop him.
I used to be doubtful that enlarging the Supreme Court under a democratic president would be very helpful because we could well end up with a court the size of congress. But at this rate, stacking the court like McConnell did looks like a better way out every day. The first order of business would be to overturn Citizens United; the second would be to rewrite the rules for corporate governance, especially as regards federal aid in both cash and kind; and the third would be to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine for all news programs televised nationwide. Gosh, I almost forgot! Enforcement of section 3 of Amendment 14 would have to be automatic!
I believe that is what he should do, of course, not what he will do….ignore politics, act with integrity and basic, decent respect for the country and the rule of law.
And of course Thomas will claim he is like the "Justins" of Tennessee, dismissed because of his race. That's what he said when accused by Anita Hill (also black) of sexual harassment at his selection hearing. "This is a lynching!" He ought to be ashamed of himself to equate his surprisingly white supremacist behavior to racial discrimination. He has nowhere suffered the same as most black people.
He has been trouble from minute one. Let him complain and distort what is plainly the reality. Thomas has enjoyed privilege and elitism, it is true, though I have come to understand that in this society all Black people suffer constant microaggressions (and macroaggressions) Supreme Court Justice or not.
True, Donna. I am hoping he might recognize that he's done wrong rather than claim he is a victim as he did during the hearings. But that's not been his modus operandi. Thanks for your insight.
Garland, in my humble opinion was a tremendous mistake. I loved Ari Melber saying””Don’t order a pizza from Garland because it will come 3 years late. The timid compulsive one , Garland jcould have prevented an insurrection. He should have investigated Trump quickly the weak willed hyper rule constrained impotent do nothing. Come on Garland I am I hoping Smith will save you.I m restraining myself from saying way more provoking and critical things. JUST DO SOMETHING ABOUT TRUMP.!
A huge mistake. Adam Schiff would've been the best choice and I am sure that by this time we would not have had this Trumpesque circus "sue-you, sue-me".
Sorry I misspoke but I think he was a huge mistake. Any other AG and Trump would be on trial by now. Garland is spineless. Maybe you are a Trumper?????
But I disagree with you that anyone else would have been able to bring an indictment by now. Trump has slipped the noose so many times in the last 40+ years of mafia connections, blatant fraud, money laundering, he was taught how to play the loophole game by Roy Cohn and he learned those lessons well.
Anyone going after him has to be aware of his tricks. I think pulling Jack Smith in was the smartest move Garland could make. He has experience with this level of international crime.
Blaming Garland is just nonsense. Garland is not going to bring an indictment just for the sake of charging him. When and if he brings an indictment it will stick. Disliking Garland just means you are not paying attention to what all Garland is doing. Garland is as far from spineless as one can get. He has been bringing cases on many of the investigations left hanging from the Mueller investigation, he has been bringing in cartel leaders, he has even been successfully bringing indictments against government officials in other countries, successfully pursuing and bringing people to trial who thought they were untouchable.
I want to see Trump indicted as much as anyone, but that is not enough, I want to see a successful prosecution and Justice.
Why the very long wait on arresting Trump for the insurrection? I don’t get it.
He’s no different than the rest of us unless they are all afraid of him.
They arrested that 21 year old yesterday for leaking classified documents and we barely knew about that for two days before he was cuffed; now why the very long wait about Trump. Nobody id above the law.
I like Garland BUT I think he’s letting other people run the department.
Maybe Jack Smith will do what Garland needed to do in the first place and not wait forever to do it.
Trump is a lot more entangled in multiple crimes than your hand-cuffed 21-year-old, whose crime is mostly a case of a lack of a fuller education. The more crime there is to find, the longer it takes to reel it in. I'm glad to read others who are defending Garland. His boyish face is deceptive.
I listened to a discussion about the possible chronology of Jack Smith's investigation if it would lead to charges and trial - and the VERY, VERY disheartening point was that the timing is worsening by the day - because tRump declared himself a 2024 candidate and escalating legal charges by DOJ will likely overlap with campaigning, primaries, election. In other words, there is high likelihood that tRump will skate again. And what they call the "slow-walking" by Merrick Garland is a big reason why. We do have to remember that the vile, filthy pseudo-attorney and tRump AG and personal attorney-cum-AG William, Step Up to the Bar So I Can Snooker Everybody, Barr was the first to obstruct and interfere with even the barest suggestion of accountability for tRump. Why is HE still walking around, spouting his self-serving, efforts to save his own skin, bilge? Why isn't HE indicted for obstruction of justice - and give him a double charge because he WAS "justice" under tRump!
I feel for Garland; he has an imaginably difficult job, no matter how you look at it, but my goodness, the ONE thing of greatest importance - the ex-President/still-Loser who attempted the overthrow of our government being charged with sedition at least, treason more reasonably (classified documents), obstruction of JUSTICE, etc. etc. - and yet: crickets.... it is very, very difficult to understand Garland.
One of the not-often mentioned other dangers in DOJ not charging tRump is that it sets precedent for future (and current) Presidents and future crime syndicates in office, fascism as government or other horrors not even yet imagined. It is a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE (possible) outcome.
Mr. Garland may have been a fine judge, but he is breaking our hearts as AG.
And for that, Biden is responsible. WHY did Biden nominate such a meek milquetoasty fellow where a serious, tough, experienced bull dog attorney is needed? Time is not only a'wasting; it may be running out.
Biden should retire from further campaigning or running for 2nd term and announce very soon so that excellent Democratic candidates can rise and shine!
SPW, yes, Roberts, as Chief Justice should be doing the reminding and "policing" of the court's members, but it has to be hard for him since he is clearly unequipped. He also has a wife with connections who "may" be getting gifts of her own that are not being reported. Fox in the henhouse (as it were)?
Whoa! I had no idea about Roberts. It does make perfect sense though. Make sure the Chief’s hands are dirty so he can’t come after anyone else who finds him or herself in a “situation”. He was a Bush appointee.
SPW, how interesting, I had forgotten that Thomas was appointed by Daddy Bush and Roberts by the son, neither of whom should have ever been president. They both left us with justices that they should have been ashamed to even nominate.
At the time GHW Bush appointed Thomas, he was reported to have been desperate to appoint a Black judge, ANY Black judge, and this is what we got. Then, the FBI didn't bother to look into others who came forward after Anita Hill, just as they sat on their cell phones when accusations poured in about Kavanaugh. And Biden was one of Thomas's endorsers.
Thanks for the link. I read it and it came back to me that Scalia was the diversion of the day I believe. Well, Scalia had the grace to die. Too bad a few others won’t be taking that way out anytime soon. In this day of 24/7 news and propaganda it’s way too easy to get overloaded. I wish I could defrag my overworked brain so I could keep all these various issues at hand. Senator Dick Durban has called for an investigation by the Senate Judicial Committee. Big whoop! Where has he been these many years of supreme judicial corruption? Maybe now the stench of rotting ethics violations has finally reached his nose and ignoring it can no longer be ignored? We’ll just have to wait and see how far this “investigation” goes.
I didn’t think anyone was allowed to “use that defense”. I can’t remember the context, but I remember hearing the phrase “Ignorance of the law is no excuse” quite a bit back in high school & college “. (I’m pretty sure the context would have been in relation to possession of marijuana... we were not particularly interested or concerned about too many other legal questions back then.)
Everybody who works for the Federal government knows this. My father, a WWII navy veteran and Civil Engineer, spent his entire career in Federal Civil Service working with DIA, NLM, and NBS fighting the Cold War in military intelligence. He never accepted anything from anybody — no free coffee, no lunches, no dinners, no drinks, not a stick of gum. In these positions, you have to avoid not only impropriety and the appearance of impropriety but also the possibility of influence, leverage, or indebtedness to anybody for anything. That a Supreme Court Justice with no real or natural friendship with a significant political donor would believe he could accept these lavish gifts without actual impropriety, much less creating the appearance of impropriety or the possibility of influence, leverage, or indebtedness, is absurd. And that’s the point: Thomas had no qualms about accepting these lavish gifts because (a) he was happy to be bought by a fellow radical right-wing ideologue and (b) he knew that our institutions and our systems are designed to allow exactly this kind of misbehavior at the highest levels consistent with our predatory patriarchal White Christian status quo order of power and wealth. He knew that the Supreme Court is excepted from oversight and that he could get away with it, so he did. He is a shameless liar and fraud.
And, Bob, it is not just Federal Government, it also includes, State and local government agencies and anyone doing business with them. I taught school for 18 years, and worked as a County employee for 14 years. Every year for 32 years I had to fill out a form saying I had taken no bribes or gifts of any monetary value, nor had stocks, bonds or shares, with any entity that did business with the school district or government agency. For the next 18 years i worked in private business but was in State and County agencies. Sometimes I had to listen to stupid HR presentations about not offering bribes or gifts. So in America it is only the ultra wealthy and high up elected and appointed officials who get away with this crap. So, it's up to us to ferret out the Clarence Thomas's, John Robert's, and the trumpster's and not vote for them. No wonder so many Americans hold their government in low esteem. Thank goodness for the few honest men and women who serve us without looking to enrich themselves. Too bad we no longer have a press and media corps we can trust. Do you think we could clone a young Dan Rather to return? Also a shout out to ProPublica for good old-fashioned, hones investigative reporting.
So, Thomass would have known long before he was seated on the SC bench about this code of conduct that was required for all judges throughout his judicial career. This unjust justice saying he wasn't aware of this law today is like a baseball player making it all the way to the major leagues after playing for 15 years and not knowing how many strikes he gets as a batter before he's called out. We need an umpire to toss his ass out of the box. The Houston Asstros will probably hire him.
Most of us who watched that awful display never had any doubts about Thomas's lack of integrity. We believed Anita Hill - still do! (We also believe Christine Blasey Ford.)
Bob. I only worked for the government for 4 years but was informed of the rules about "gifts" from day one. I had a very low level job (which I loved) and was not holding a position that made decisions for anyone as our Clarence does. Thomas is not all that bright (deliberately chosen for his lack of brilliance when there were other Black judges who could have served better at the time). He knew what he was doing was wrong. He just hoped he wouldn't get caught and that if/when he did get caught he knew he could lie his way out of it because he has a lifetime appointment and Congress would never impeach him. It would look bad for a mostly white Congress to call out a Black male justice. He knows how to make that work for himself. I look for no change in the future. Thomas has this scenario nailed.
Totally correct about Thomas’ attitude. He is not at all fond of the country, carries around major resentments, and likes nothing better than hanging society up by its petard. Showing us all how easily our rules can be flaunted gives him great pleasure.
I do not think Thomas is secretly harboring ANY resentments - he has just done all the things that make him feel accepted & 'one of us' which have been carefully placed before him to trip him into that situation. He is probably just a bit bewildered by all this attention now since he has gotten away with things for so long, but I do not see him as secretly harboring even a moment of black resentment, I think he really thinks he is proving that you can be black & be accepted - which he is, as long as he allows them all to control his life. It's sad that the truth is now getting outed, because before he represented a chance for ambitious blacks to get somewhere, now he shows what the price is for that if you are not careful ! I think 'getting ahead' is a very dodgy business in life if you are not prepared to stand for principles & let the other stuff prevail - because it will try to take you over ! Hence all those rules for the pols !
One would guess that just about any subscriber to his Substack would be happy to feed Professor Reich were he to stop by (our family would - no question!)...
...IFF you were a Justice on the Supreme court. Labor Secretaries pay their own way. Especially when dining with a huge employer and someone always pushing for rmore H1B visas so he can get foreign programmers cheaper than their US counterparts. More wine please!! Billy-boy is paying!!
Yes, that's the standard, and the law, that I followed as a career diplomat. Later, as a state commissioner, I limited myself to accepting no more than a cup of coffee.
That’s one of the things that I find so shameful and abhorrent about Republicans. Yes, you could have gotten away with excepting more than a cup of coffee, but you didn’t because you knew it was inappropriate.
Today’s Republicans were apparently raised by their parents to have no ethics. No sense of right, and wrong and acceptable behavior.
Instead of “I could do it, sure. But I won’t because that would be wrong.” we get “I could do it, sure. And so I do.”
That’s the response you get from people who know, who KNOW, that what they’re doing is wrong. And are trying to put the blame for their actions on someone else.
It’s “You would do this. So that’s why I’m doing it. I’m doing it because YOU would if you were in my position. So it’s really YOUR fault that I’m committing this crime.“
Hope Mr Justice Thomas reads your account of lunch with Bill. I d like his explanation for why the same ethical standards in the Executive branch are waived in the Judicial Branch of our government.
Robert, yes, and wouldn't you think a justice, someone making decisions about life and death would have to have a strong moral compass and the ability to weigh evidence and come to a decision based on that evidence, not personal feelings and beliefs? It does not look as though Republicans need those criteria for judges or justices because they only want rulings that favor their authoritarian viewpoint.
It’s looking more and more like that is the sole reason these justices were put in such a supreme position. They have served to erode the legs of Justice of impartiality.
Well, according to Chief Justice Roberts, Supreme Court justices tend to follow the code of ethics that is in place for the rest of the federal judiciary. And because they tend to follow them, it’s not really necessary to actually apply that code to the Supreme Court.
Which is course is a weak ass, pathetic attempt at rationalizing their refusal to be bound by a code of ethics.
Hey, Mr. Chief Justice. If you’re following a code of ethics already, why the refusal to actually make it required that you follow the code? Either way there wouldn’t be any change in what you do, because you’re already doing (supposedly) the right thing. So why do you object to having consequences if you fail to do the right thing?
And the answer is obvious: Because they want to be able to violate a code of ethics, and if they were actually bound by one, there would be consequences.
Don, Thomas was not chosen for his competence or brilliance. He was the HW Bush's racist hit on the Black community and the rest of us too. Bush gave America a mediocre judge with limited morals to serve for decades. People thought of HW Bush as such a kind fellow "thousand points of light" and all that, but he was a manipulator who also was never held accountable for his bad behavior (Iran-Contra and other CIA stuff we may never learn of). Thomas does know what he is doing. He lies about it but is not even a good liar. No one but the most pathetic right-wingers believes a word of his defense.
Don, I think we both know that this isn’t about smart or dumb. I’m sure Clearance worked his tush off making promises so that he would be appointed. He got what he came for, all the perks and deference that his position demands and all the “important” people pretending just like him in order to get what they wanted from him. It’s not Justice--it’s business.
I have been a public servant a few times during my working career. I worked for a non-profit, government grant funded program, the USPS and for a New York State County Department of Social Services. I always felt very nervous accepting any gifts in all of these jobs. I would accept produce from a client's garden and place it in our work break room, so that I alone, would not benefit from the bounty. The modest gifts offered were heartfelt and appreciated but I often declined for fear of appearing to be giving "favors" or favored treatment. How disappointing that our higher officials in Government work cannot feel the same apprehension that I and others in lowly positions have felt.
I still have bottles of liquor in my pantry - 20 years worth of seasons' greetings for pounding the pavement as a USPS letter carrier. If you saw my pantry, you'd swear I was some kind of alcoholic. I've been retired for 17 years. I could eat bourbon & peppercorn filets for the rest of my life and still leave a legacy! LOL!
Bless you for 20 years with the USPS. I only made it for 8.5 years--a City carrier, distribution clerk, window clerk and then supervisor, which is what did me in. I should have stayed a window clerk.
Agree. I spent 26 years in the fire service, rising through the ranks from rookie to chief fire officer. It gets lonelier with altitude. My grunt buddies were even hesitant to be seen having personal conversations with me (lots of down time in a fire station). I could have saved thousands of hours studying for promotion with its stress and isolation and stayed a few years longer. My early retirement was due mostly to professional life as a “boss” and its sour taste for me. The “prestige” was not worth the sacrifice. The grunts who stayed longer, in our city anyway, ended up with as big or bigger pensions and mustering out bonuses.
USPS workers, especially letter carriers, are my heroes! I love the USPS and you folks.
May I add my usual cri du coeur: WHY is Louis DeJoy still in his office putting into effect the full privatization of OUR United States Postal Service?!!
My clients are at the movie studios and at Christmas we liked to send Starbucks gift cards. Most people would just email “thanks”, but a couple of VPs would call and say “thanks, but can’t accept” and have their assistant mail it back. But if a Saudi wants to invest $2 billion with a young man with a troubled real estate history, who’s to say no?
Allison, at least! I wonder of Prof. Reich remembers what the meal included. He'll never forget the price. What disturbs me too is that Bill Gates or anyone else thought it OK to take a public employee to such an expensive restaurant. Gates knew the "gifts" rule. It reinforces my view that Gates was not the "decent" guy he was portrayed as. Every day, our congress members face an army of lobbyists who are trying to get them to break the "gifts" rules. Getting rid of paid lobbyists could be a good move toward a more responsive government to the needs of the people.
This is what conscientious honest people do. At my first job at Jack in the Box ( back in 1972 I believe) I dropped an egg on the floor. I immediately offered to pay out of my next paycheck.The manager looked at me like I was an idiot.
“he didn’t believe he had to”
A Supreme Court Justice pleads ignorance of the law. I don’t think a Supreme Court Justice gets use that defense.
And someone(wake up Justice Roberts!)should be reminding Clarence that ignorance of the law is no excuse.
Roberts should have already publicly asked Clarence for his resignation; started writing a serious code of ethics that even a Supreme Court Justice can understand; and demand reviews by all remaining Justices for strict ethical compliance.
I won’t be holding my breath. Not too optimistic about Garland, either.
Just think what that $100++ lunch would cost today.
New York State employees were unable to accept a cup of coffee without concerns of charges of unethical behavior.
I am so tired of this country which worships billionaires and is taking away my basic right to control my body.
Nancy, I am boggled that there are restaurants that serve lunches they charge over $50.00 for and that there are lots of folks willing to pay for those lunches. I can't help wondering how many of those lunches our SC justices have eaten and if any of them was told to pay the inviter back afterwards.
It's probably their everyday lunch. That's how many of the filthy rich eat.
I wouldn’t know. I check my balance every day to see if or how much I have
It depends on where you live. In D.C. that is not unusual. It is an expensive place to live and work. That is why most people do not live there, they live in Virginia or Maryland. Cities in California even more so.
My husband was a police officer for 20 years and he wouldn’t even accept a free doughnut or cup of coffee when offered.
You will never convince me any more that Roberts didn’t know about what was going on with Thomas and his traitorous wife. The Chief Justice has been the judicial whore too long not to have heard anything about any of the foibles of the others of his ilk. It’s a good thing the hem of his robe is already black.
SPW, well-said. The knowledge of what Thomas was up to as well as his wife's "work" has to have been known by Roberts, but how does a guy playing in the same pool stop the others swimming there too? Each one of the "conservative" justices was carefully chosen for their willingness to behave badly and cover it up with feigned ignorance and lies, and those Conservative Justices are all really good at it, just check out their hearings and the decisions they have issued from the bench. They are not stellar, barely adequate justices, and proud of it.
My thoughts exactly. Ginni did this
Neil ,be serious. Even though I think chief justice, John Roberts has half a brain he isn’t about to remove tokenClarence Thomas. That would create an opening that Biden could fill. And no chinless McConnell could stop him.
I used to be doubtful that enlarging the Supreme Court under a democratic president would be very helpful because we could well end up with a court the size of congress. But at this rate, stacking the court like McConnell did looks like a better way out every day. The first order of business would be to overturn Citizens United; the second would be to rewrite the rules for corporate governance, especially as regards federal aid in both cash and kind; and the third would be to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine for all news programs televised nationwide. Gosh, I almost forgot! Enforcement of section 3 of Amendment 14 would have to be automatic!
Can you run for the Presidency, fast?!
Well said!
These are the actions that occurred to me as well. And, yes, I was doubtful that expanding the Court would be helpful. Now, I’m not.
I prefer to see President Biden replace Thomas and Alito.
I believe that is what he should do, of course, not what he will do….ignore politics, act with integrity and basic, decent respect for the country and the rule of law.
And of course Thomas will claim he is like the "Justins" of Tennessee, dismissed because of his race. That's what he said when accused by Anita Hill (also black) of sexual harassment at his selection hearing. "This is a lynching!" He ought to be ashamed of himself to equate his surprisingly white supremacist behavior to racial discrimination. He has nowhere suffered the same as most black people.
He has been trouble from minute one. Let him complain and distort what is plainly the reality. Thomas has enjoyed privilege and elitism, it is true, though I have come to understand that in this society all Black people suffer constant microaggressions (and macroaggressions) Supreme Court Justice or not.
True, Donna. I am hoping he might recognize that he's done wrong rather than claim he is a victim as he did during the hearings. But that's not been his modus operandi. Thanks for your insight.
Obviously, during his formative years, no one ever recommended he should read uncle Tom’s cabin. so sorry, Harriet.
Trump's practice of name-calling seems to be contagious, unfortunately.
Garland, in my humble opinion was a tremendous mistake. I loved Ari Melber saying””Don’t order a pizza from Garland because it will come 3 years late. The timid compulsive one , Garland jcould have prevented an insurrection. He should have investigated Trump quickly the weak willed hyper rule constrained impotent do nothing. Come on Garland I am I hoping Smith will save you.I m restraining myself from saying way more provoking and critical things. JUST DO SOMETHING ABOUT TRUMP.!
A huge mistake. Adam Schiff would've been the best choice and I am sure that by this time we would not have had this Trumpesque circus "sue-you, sue-me".
But we don't want to lose Adam Schiff from the House. Nyall Katyal or Andrew Weissmann would have been GREAT.
Garland was NOT AG on Jan. 6.
Explain to me how he could have prevented the insurrection?
Sorry I misspoke but I think he was a huge mistake. Any other AG and Trump would be on trial by now. Garland is spineless. Maybe you are a Trumper?????
hahaha...uh no.
But I disagree with you that anyone else would have been able to bring an indictment by now. Trump has slipped the noose so many times in the last 40+ years of mafia connections, blatant fraud, money laundering, he was taught how to play the loophole game by Roy Cohn and he learned those lessons well.
Anyone going after him has to be aware of his tricks. I think pulling Jack Smith in was the smartest move Garland could make. He has experience with this level of international crime.
Blaming Garland is just nonsense. Garland is not going to bring an indictment just for the sake of charging him. When and if he brings an indictment it will stick. Disliking Garland just means you are not paying attention to what all Garland is doing. Garland is as far from spineless as one can get. He has been bringing cases on many of the investigations left hanging from the Mueller investigation, he has been bringing in cartel leaders, he has even been successfully bringing indictments against government officials in other countries, successfully pursuing and bringing people to trial who thought they were untouchable.
I want to see Trump indicted as much as anyone, but that is not enough, I want to see a successful prosecution and Justice.
I totally agree with all of what you said.
Why the very long wait on arresting Trump for the insurrection? I don’t get it.
He’s no different than the rest of us unless they are all afraid of him.
They arrested that 21 year old yesterday for leaking classified documents and we barely knew about that for two days before he was cuffed; now why the very long wait about Trump. Nobody id above the law.
I like Garland BUT I think he’s letting other people run the department.
Maybe Jack Smith will do what Garland needed to do in the first place and not wait forever to do it.
Trump is a lot more entangled in multiple crimes than your hand-cuffed 21-year-old, whose crime is mostly a case of a lack of a fuller education. The more crime there is to find, the longer it takes to reel it in. I'm glad to read others who are defending Garland. His boyish face is deceptive.
I listened to a discussion about the possible chronology of Jack Smith's investigation if it would lead to charges and trial - and the VERY, VERY disheartening point was that the timing is worsening by the day - because tRump declared himself a 2024 candidate and escalating legal charges by DOJ will likely overlap with campaigning, primaries, election. In other words, there is high likelihood that tRump will skate again. And what they call the "slow-walking" by Merrick Garland is a big reason why. We do have to remember that the vile, filthy pseudo-attorney and tRump AG and personal attorney-cum-AG William, Step Up to the Bar So I Can Snooker Everybody, Barr was the first to obstruct and interfere with even the barest suggestion of accountability for tRump. Why is HE still walking around, spouting his self-serving, efforts to save his own skin, bilge? Why isn't HE indicted for obstruction of justice - and give him a double charge because he WAS "justice" under tRump!
I feel for Garland; he has an imaginably difficult job, no matter how you look at it, but my goodness, the ONE thing of greatest importance - the ex-President/still-Loser who attempted the overthrow of our government being charged with sedition at least, treason more reasonably (classified documents), obstruction of JUSTICE, etc. etc. - and yet: crickets.... it is very, very difficult to understand Garland.
One of the not-often mentioned other dangers in DOJ not charging tRump is that it sets precedent for future (and current) Presidents and future crime syndicates in office, fascism as government or other horrors not even yet imagined. It is a TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE (possible) outcome.
Mr. Garland may have been a fine judge, but he is breaking our hearts as AG.
And for that, Biden is responsible. WHY did Biden nominate such a meek milquetoasty fellow where a serious, tough, experienced bull dog attorney is needed? Time is not only a'wasting; it may be running out.
Biden should retire from further campaigning or running for 2nd term and announce very soon so that excellent Democratic candidates can rise and shine!
Garland has ZERO control over the Supreme Court.
The Judicial is a separate branch of government.
Can u imagine .He also had no his other judges . They advised him he didn’t have to devalgue it.How much has the rest of them stolen.Get him out.
Right on . This sucks.
Roberts appears to lack the virtue and character that would prioritize this, that would compel him to promulgate enforceable ethics standards.
SPW, yes, Roberts, as Chief Justice should be doing the reminding and "policing" of the court's members, but it has to be hard for him since he is clearly unequipped. He also has a wife with connections who "may" be getting gifts of her own that are not being reported. Fox in the henhouse (as it were)?
Whoa! I had no idea about Roberts. It does make perfect sense though. Make sure the Chief’s hands are dirty so he can’t come after anyone else who finds him or herself in a “situation”. He was a Bush appointee.
SPW, how interesting, I had forgotten that Thomas was appointed by Daddy Bush and Roberts by the son, neither of whom should have ever been president. They both left us with justices that they should have been ashamed to even nominate.
At the time GHW Bush appointed Thomas, he was reported to have been desperate to appoint a Black judge, ANY Black judge, and this is what we got. Then, the FBI didn't bother to look into others who came forward after Anita Hill, just as they sat on their cell phones when accusations poured in about Kavanaugh. And Biden was one of Thomas's endorsers.
https://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_votes/vote1021/vote_102_1_00220.htm
The vote was 52”48. The usual Dem suspects voted yes, white, southern trash conservatives. Two Rs voted no, Jeffers’s VT and Packwood OR
Biden didn't approve Thomas for the Supreme Court although he presided over the hearing, if I recall correctly.
Funny, not really, that Biden also presided over the Anita Hill hearing and how was that resolved. SMH
Can Clarence Thomas say he paid back for his gifts in services rendered (wink and point to some SCOTUS decisions)?
He already knows that, but doesn't care because he & his wife are above the law, or so it seems.
Roberts won't do anything. It appears that his wife is highly influential for matters of the court and legislature. It's sad
Old news. https://www.commoncause.org/resource/supreme-conflict/
Thanks for the link. I read it and it came back to me that Scalia was the diversion of the day I believe. Well, Scalia had the grace to die. Too bad a few others won’t be taking that way out anytime soon. In this day of 24/7 news and propaganda it’s way too easy to get overloaded. I wish I could defrag my overworked brain so I could keep all these various issues at hand. Senator Dick Durban has called for an investigation by the Senate Judicial Committee. Big whoop! Where has he been these many years of supreme judicial corruption? Maybe now the stench of rotting ethics violations has finally reached his nose and ignoring it can no longer be ignored? We’ll just have to wait and see how far this “investigation” goes.
I didn’t see your comment before I wrote a virtually identical one!
Exactly!
Whatever happened to "ignorance is no defense..."
I completely agree. Thomas’ excuse is very lame.
Any excuse in a storm of protest?
He claimed he asked advice from "others in the judiciary," so maybe there is a lot of this?
“he didn’t believe he had to”
And he was right in that belief. Unfortunately.
Because there are no ethics requirements for a Supreme Court justice.
I didn’t think anyone was allowed to “use that defense”. I can’t remember the context, but I remember hearing the phrase “Ignorance of the law is no excuse” quite a bit back in high school & college “. (I’m pretty sure the context would have been in relation to possession of marijuana... we were not particularly interested or concerned about too many other legal questions back then.)
He didn’t believe he had to is a Trump excuse. Thomas will get away with it because he knows he can. Just like Trump has gotten away with so much!
You did the right thing Professor Reich!😎 maybe I should say the “left” thing since today the “right” thing seems to be wrong.
Reminds me of this: the left is right and the right is wrong, so that makes the left right, and the right wrong.
When right is wrong the only thing left is left.
The right lacks ethics . . . Which is wrong.
Everybody who works for the Federal government knows this. My father, a WWII navy veteran and Civil Engineer, spent his entire career in Federal Civil Service working with DIA, NLM, and NBS fighting the Cold War in military intelligence. He never accepted anything from anybody — no free coffee, no lunches, no dinners, no drinks, not a stick of gum. In these positions, you have to avoid not only impropriety and the appearance of impropriety but also the possibility of influence, leverage, or indebtedness to anybody for anything. That a Supreme Court Justice with no real or natural friendship with a significant political donor would believe he could accept these lavish gifts without actual impropriety, much less creating the appearance of impropriety or the possibility of influence, leverage, or indebtedness, is absurd. And that’s the point: Thomas had no qualms about accepting these lavish gifts because (a) he was happy to be bought by a fellow radical right-wing ideologue and (b) he knew that our institutions and our systems are designed to allow exactly this kind of misbehavior at the highest levels consistent with our predatory patriarchal White Christian status quo order of power and wealth. He knew that the Supreme Court is excepted from oversight and that he could get away with it, so he did. He is a shameless liar and fraud.
And, Bob, it is not just Federal Government, it also includes, State and local government agencies and anyone doing business with them. I taught school for 18 years, and worked as a County employee for 14 years. Every year for 32 years I had to fill out a form saying I had taken no bribes or gifts of any monetary value, nor had stocks, bonds or shares, with any entity that did business with the school district or government agency. For the next 18 years i worked in private business but was in State and County agencies. Sometimes I had to listen to stupid HR presentations about not offering bribes or gifts. So in America it is only the ultra wealthy and high up elected and appointed officials who get away with this crap. So, it's up to us to ferret out the Clarence Thomas's, John Robert's, and the trumpster's and not vote for them. No wonder so many Americans hold their government in low esteem. Thank goodness for the few honest men and women who serve us without looking to enrich themselves. Too bad we no longer have a press and media corps we can trust. Do you think we could clone a young Dan Rather to return? Also a shout out to ProPublica for good old-fashioned, hones investigative reporting.
So, Thomass would have known long before he was seated on the SC bench about this code of conduct that was required for all judges throughout his judicial career. This unjust justice saying he wasn't aware of this law today is like a baseball player making it all the way to the major leagues after playing for 15 years and not knowing how many strikes he gets as a batter before he's called out. We need an umpire to toss his ass out of the box. The Houston Asstros will probably hire him.
We do have some journalists we can trust.
If you are going to clone, please make it Walter Cronkite.
I'll take Walter Cronkite and add Tom Brokaw LOL
Brings a whole new light to whether Anita Hill was telling the truth doesn't it
Most of us who watched that awful display never had any doubts about Thomas's lack of integrity. We believed Anita Hill - still do! (We also believe Christine Blasey Ford.)
Ford admitted she lied
Not true.
She did not. That is not true.
I always believed her.
Disbelieving women was then, and still is, a thing.
I believed her then, and I believe her now.
Me too! Anita and Christine: both credible sheroes!
Bob. I only worked for the government for 4 years but was informed of the rules about "gifts" from day one. I had a very low level job (which I loved) and was not holding a position that made decisions for anyone as our Clarence does. Thomas is not all that bright (deliberately chosen for his lack of brilliance when there were other Black judges who could have served better at the time). He knew what he was doing was wrong. He just hoped he wouldn't get caught and that if/when he did get caught he knew he could lie his way out of it because he has a lifetime appointment and Congress would never impeach him. It would look bad for a mostly white Congress to call out a Black male justice. He knows how to make that work for himself. I look for no change in the future. Thomas has this scenario nailed.
Totally correct about Thomas’ attitude. He is not at all fond of the country, carries around major resentments, and likes nothing better than hanging society up by its petard. Showing us all how easily our rules can be flaunted gives him great pleasure.
I do not think Thomas is secretly harboring ANY resentments - he has just done all the things that make him feel accepted & 'one of us' which have been carefully placed before him to trip him into that situation. He is probably just a bit bewildered by all this attention now since he has gotten away with things for so long, but I do not see him as secretly harboring even a moment of black resentment, I think he really thinks he is proving that you can be black & be accepted - which he is, as long as he allows them all to control his life. It's sad that the truth is now getting outed, because before he represented a chance for ambitious blacks to get somewhere, now he shows what the price is for that if you are not careful ! I think 'getting ahead' is a very dodgy business in life if you are not prepared to stand for principles & let the other stuff prevail - because it will try to take you over ! Hence all those rules for the pols !
Oh yes, “our” Clarence knows how to play the black card! Remember his use of “lynching” characterizing his confirmation hearings?
Too bad Gates wasn't already your "dearest friend." You would've eaten for free.
One would guess that just about any subscriber to his Substack would be happy to feed Professor Reich were he to stop by (our family would - no question!)...
Same here. We had leavened bread, tonight!!
Rishi, yes, and the meal we offered would be excellent and not cost more than $50.00.
...IFF you were a Justice on the Supreme court. Labor Secretaries pay their own way. Especially when dining with a huge employer and someone always pushing for rmore H1B visas so he can get foreign programmers cheaper than their US counterparts. More wine please!! Billy-boy is paying!!
Boy, and don't we know it!!!! I worked in that field too.
Yes, that's the standard, and the law, that I followed as a career diplomat. Later, as a state commissioner, I limited myself to accepting no more than a cup of coffee.
That’s one of the things that I find so shameful and abhorrent about Republicans. Yes, you could have gotten away with excepting more than a cup of coffee, but you didn’t because you knew it was inappropriate.
Today’s Republicans were apparently raised by their parents to have no ethics. No sense of right, and wrong and acceptable behavior.
Instead of “I could do it, sure. But I won’t because that would be wrong.” we get “I could do it, sure. And so I do.”
I’ve read SO many YT comments re Thomas, Ivanka, etc.; that post “You’d do it too if you could”. Uh, NO.
That’s the response you get from people who know, who KNOW, that what they’re doing is wrong. And are trying to put the blame for their actions on someone else.
It’s “You would do this. So that’s why I’m doing it. I’m doing it because YOU would if you were in my position. So it’s really YOUR fault that I’m committing this crime.“
Absolutely. They posit that everyone’s a criminal, thereby excusing their own actions.
Gifts should be limited to non-alcoholic beverages
Hope Mr Justice Thomas reads your account of lunch with Bill. I d like his explanation for why the same ethical standards in the Executive branch are waived in the Judicial Branch of our government.
I’d like to know why all propriety is waived for the highest court in the land. Did I miss someone dying and making Clarence God?
Robert, yes, and wouldn't you think a justice, someone making decisions about life and death would have to have a strong moral compass and the ability to weigh evidence and come to a decision based on that evidence, not personal feelings and beliefs? It does not look as though Republicans need those criteria for judges or justices because they only want rulings that favor their authoritarian viewpoint.
It’s looking more and more like that is the sole reason these justices were put in such a supreme position. They have served to erode the legs of Justice of impartiality.
Well, according to Chief Justice Roberts, Supreme Court justices tend to follow the code of ethics that is in place for the rest of the federal judiciary. And because they tend to follow them, it’s not really necessary to actually apply that code to the Supreme Court.
Which is course is a weak ass, pathetic attempt at rationalizing their refusal to be bound by a code of ethics.
Hey, Mr. Chief Justice. If you’re following a code of ethics already, why the refusal to actually make it required that you follow the code? Either way there wouldn’t be any change in what you do, because you’re already doing (supposedly) the right thing. So why do you object to having consequences if you fail to do the right thing?
And the answer is obvious: Because they want to be able to violate a code of ethics, and if they were actually bound by one, there would be consequences.
Wow. Wonderful story. Integrity is a great thing!
Honesty. That’s the difference between “us” and “them”. I admire you.
I love your personal stories. Is Clarence Thomas really that dumb, or just doesn't care?
Doesn't care.
A third option is that he feels privileged.
Don, Thomas was not chosen for his competence or brilliance. He was the HW Bush's racist hit on the Black community and the rest of us too. Bush gave America a mediocre judge with limited morals to serve for decades. People thought of HW Bush as such a kind fellow "thousand points of light" and all that, but he was a manipulator who also was never held accountable for his bad behavior (Iran-Contra and other CIA stuff we may never learn of). Thomas does know what he is doing. He lies about it but is not even a good liar. No one but the most pathetic right-wingers believes a word of his defense.
He lies about everything because he feels inviolable
Don, I think we both know that this isn’t about smart or dumb. I’m sure Clearance worked his tush off making promises so that he would be appointed. He got what he came for, all the perks and deference that his position demands and all the “important” people pretending just like him in order to get what they wanted from him. It’s not Justice--it’s business.
Does not care.
Why not both?
You are an honest man. I trust what you say and admire your efforts to make the world a good and peaceful place thank you.
I have been a public servant a few times during my working career. I worked for a non-profit, government grant funded program, the USPS and for a New York State County Department of Social Services. I always felt very nervous accepting any gifts in all of these jobs. I would accept produce from a client's garden and place it in our work break room, so that I alone, would not benefit from the bounty. The modest gifts offered were heartfelt and appreciated but I often declined for fear of appearing to be giving "favors" or favored treatment. How disappointing that our higher officials in Government work cannot feel the same apprehension that I and others in lowly positions have felt.
I still have bottles of liquor in my pantry - 20 years worth of seasons' greetings for pounding the pavement as a USPS letter carrier. If you saw my pantry, you'd swear I was some kind of alcoholic. I've been retired for 17 years. I could eat bourbon & peppercorn filets for the rest of my life and still leave a legacy! LOL!
Bless you for 20 years with the USPS. I only made it for 8.5 years--a City carrier, distribution clerk, window clerk and then supervisor, which is what did me in. I should have stayed a window clerk.
Agree. I spent 26 years in the fire service, rising through the ranks from rookie to chief fire officer. It gets lonelier with altitude. My grunt buddies were even hesitant to be seen having personal conversations with me (lots of down time in a fire station). I could have saved thousands of hours studying for promotion with its stress and isolation and stayed a few years longer. My early retirement was due mostly to professional life as a “boss” and its sour taste for me. The “prestige” was not worth the sacrifice. The grunts who stayed longer, in our city anyway, ended up with as big or bigger pensions and mustering out bonuses.
USPS workers, especially letter carriers, are my heroes! I love the USPS and you folks.
May I add my usual cri du coeur: WHY is Louis DeJoy still in his office putting into effect the full privatization of OUR United States Postal Service?!!
Wake up, Biden, and do something!
As a California state employee I could accept exactly zero gifts. No biggie to me. Never got a call from Mr Gates. 😏
Have you had a $135 lunch since?
My clients are at the movie studios and at Christmas we liked to send Starbucks gift cards. Most people would just email “thanks”, but a couple of VPs would call and say “thanks, but can’t accept” and have their assistant mail it back. But if a Saudi wants to invest $2 billion with a young man with a troubled real estate history, who’s to say no?
$135 for a lunch 30 years ago??? Wow! I hope at least your mustard was Grey Poupon!
Allison, at least! I wonder of Prof. Reich remembers what the meal included. He'll never forget the price. What disturbs me too is that Bill Gates or anyone else thought it OK to take a public employee to such an expensive restaurant. Gates knew the "gifts" rule. It reinforces my view that Gates was not the "decent" guy he was portrayed as. Every day, our congress members face an army of lobbyists who are trying to get them to break the "gifts" rules. Getting rid of paid lobbyists could be a good move toward a more responsive government to the needs of the people.
😂
This is what conscientious honest people do. At my first job at Jack in the Box ( back in 1972 I believe) I dropped an egg on the floor. I immediately offered to pay out of my next paycheck.The manager looked at me like I was an idiot.
I worked at Jack in The Box about then! First job besides in family business.