The Price of Justice and Clarence Thomas

It's reassuring that at least the Supreme Court appointees are as ethical as the people that appointed them. Who doesn't like consistency? I mean 5 times this guy checked "none" rather than report his wife's $700,000 income from a highly partisan conservative organization like the Heritage Foundation and never bothered to recuse himself while attending fundraisers for people that benefited directly from decisions like Citizens United. What is the price of Justice Clarence? I’d say it is $700,000!

Watchdog Says Clarence Thomas Failed to Report Wife's Heritage Foundation Income
Monday, January 24, 2011 | 8:32 a.m.

Government watchdog group Common Cause says records show Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas failed to report $686,589 in income that his wife earned from a conservative think tank from 2003 to 2007.

Common Cause says IRS records show Virginia Thomas received the money from the Heritage Foundation for her work there over that period. The group’s president, Bob Edgar, said in a statement that his group discovered the discrepancy while researching any potential conflicts of interest in the Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision, which opened the doors for unlimited campaign contributions by corporations.

Under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978, all federal officials are required to disclose their spouse’s non-investment income. From 2003 to 2009, Thomas checked “none,” Common Cause says.

According to Steven Lubet, a Northwestern University School of Law judicial expert quoted in the Los Angeles Times, the omission is not likely to merit consequences larger than a potential civil penalty. "I am not aware of a single case of a judge being penalized simply for this,” he told the newspaper.

This is not the first time Thomas has been dragged into the national media spotlight in recent months because of his wife. In late October, Virginia Thomas left a voice mail for Anita Hill seeking an apology for Hill's sexual harassment charges during Clarence Thomas's 1991 confirmation hearings. Not long after the incident, she resigned her post as the head of conservative group Liberty Central, citing “distractions” to the organization’s mission.

Last week, Common Cause asked the Justice Department to investigate whether Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia should have recused themselves during the Citizens United case because they attended events hosted by Charles and David Koch, billionaires who supported conservative groups that benefited from the decision.


NationalJournal.com - Watchdog Says Clarence Thomas Failed to Report Wife's Heritage Foundation Income - Monday, January 24, 2011

 

Maybe he used the same tax preparation software as TurboTax Tim Geithner. Just sayin'.

 

....or Charlie Rangel....

From reading the article, it does appear the income was reported to the IRS, afterall, the IRS was cited as the source for the information.

 

It's always funny to me that the knee jerk reaction to corruption is to point out other corruption as if it were a justification for the current corruption instead of actually reacting to the current corruption in any meaningful way whatsoever. It is sort of like the equivalent of debating a chess game with the ultimate goal of an intellectual stalemate. I imagine corruption thrives on this type of “debate” since the alternative would be to condemn anyone regardless of party affiliation for any corrupt behavior. Just sayin'.

 

Poor Charlie. You've gotta feel sorry for a guy who makes laws, but can't figure out how to use a calculator. That's it! Maybe he's an idiot savant!!

 

I'm happy to condemn the few Republicans who are corrupt along with the many Democrats who are corrupt. Just typin'.

But, is an accidental omission really corruption? I mean, seriously, he was probably using the same software as TurboTax Tim Geithner.

 

Has he been accused of corruption or did some liberal group simply object to the way he filled out a document?

From the article dr moen posted:
According to Steven Lubet, a Northwestern University School of Law judicial expert quoted in the Los Angeles Times, the omission is not likely to merit consequences larger than a potential civil penalty. "I am not aware of a single case of a judge being penalized simply for this,” he told the newspaper.
The indication is that this isn't anything out of the ordinary.

 

Even if I gave him the benefit of the doubt for all five years he "omitted" is wife's $700,000 salary, we've all done that at one time or another, but then there is, "...Thomas and Justice Antonin Scalia should have recused themselves during the Citizens United case because they attended events hosted by Charles and David Koch, billionaires who supported conservative groups that benefited from the decision."

Seems that you'll give him the benefit of the doubt for just being a Republican.

 

It appears dr moen has his "facts" wrong here (surprise, surprise). He claims Mrs Thomas' had a salary of $700k but in reality that income was earned over a number of years.

See, dr moen, when you misrepresent the facts your argument loses credibility.

 

Moen has not shown any corruption yet. All he has is some convoluted coincidences that leave open the possibility of corruption. It is not like Rod Blagojevich, Dan Walker, Otto Kerner, Jr., William J. Jefferson, Charlie Rangle, etc. who have been convicted and/or admitted such.

 

Wow! What passes for accountability and clean government on the Right side of the aisle certainly gives one cause to stop and consider the vast differences between the ethical standards the Republicans hold the Democrats to and the ethical standards the Republicans hold their own to. There couldn’t be a wider chasm.

The only reason I posted this “under the radar” story was to demonstrate exactly how hypocritical the Right wingers here are in their condemnations and hypercritical attitudes towards everything “Left”. You guys demonstrated perfectly your inability to consider any issue other than in a partisan manner. So really, what good are your opinions on any issues if all you can do is spew partisan, one-sided, biased opinions that you so often label the mainstream media as being guilty of? If you can’t tolerate this from them, why do it yourself? What kind of credibility do you think it lends your opinions?

Thanks for playing. Mission accomplished!

Why do I feel like I just stuck a stick in a hornet’s nest? Oh yeah, because you guys remind me of angry insects.

 

So what you are saying is that Obama is guilty of corruption because of his association with Antoin "Tony" Rezko? Pelosi is guilty of corruption by voting for the minimum wage law because her husband owns Del Monte stock?

 

I doubt Moen will respond to that directly. He prefers to spin it. But Moen, what part of "I'm happy to condemn the few Republicans who are corrupt along with the many Democrats who are corrupt" (see post #6) don't you understand?

 

Just admit that you guys have been played, exposed for what you are, and drowning in a pool of your own hypocrisy. I don’t really expect you to admit it, it was just fun watching you dance like the mindless puppets you are. Keep danglin'.

View attachment 130

 

Good call. I guess he cannot deal with the hypocrisy of his position.

BTW, di you notice that he got a new signature line? I guess he could not put up with my posting the second half of his Lincoln's quote.

 

Good spin from the Spinmaster himself. You should have applied for Robert Gibbs's job.

 

Yeah, if you shine sunlight on them, the lefties shrivel. It's the best disinfectant.

 

Pardon me guy's but is this Man you are talking about a Supreme Court Justice ? is he not one of those who is in the arbitor of all things legal? should he not perhaps also set the standards in following the law?
Now I dont know if he omited on pupose or by accident that in itself is irrelavant this man should be seen to be whiter than the driven snow and should not be compared to a politician.
Supreme Court Justice's can and do inturprate your constitution so please dont make excuses for him, in another thread someone mentioned a Justice declaring the health care bill as illigal Tell me how you can take such a judgment seriously if the judiciary is seen to be lining it's own pocket at the highest level?
For one moment put aside your political leanings here and look at this for what it realy is.

 

My take

If Clarence Thomas purposly skirted paying taxes, he should be investigated, tried and if guilty, impeached. The law applies to him as well.
If this was an " oversight " , and I use that term loosely, then we must look up previous and past cases that are similar. Being a justice on the SCOTUS does not make one impervious to the laws of this land.
No other case applys here, as to opinion, only law. Rangle, Geitner, et al.....if a law was broken, apply the law to the full extent, regardless of party.

I do find it rather odd that one side will jump on the other, while ignoring whats happens on their side of the aisle. My standards never change. Law is law, no matter whom is on the wrong side of it.

Virtue and integrity are imperrative at this level of the justice system, actually all levels. Pardon my speling, I type fast when aggitated ;-)

 

You missed it Jack. He paid his taxes. All of them for both he and his wife. It was his wife's income that he failed to report on a federal disclosure form.