A speech from the past: Clarence Thomas responds to Anita Hill
An eloquent defense at another hearing
Monday, September 24, 2018 at 09:00pm 22 Comments
I”m going to let this video clip stand on its own without much further commentary from me. But I think it’s very important to look back at this piece of history from twenty-seven years ago. It was both powerful and prescient:
[Neo is a writer with degrees in law and family therapy, who blogs at the new neo.]
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Yet the left does this type of thing again and again… maybe some Congress people will see the vile repercussions of these types of accusations without proof, all meant to derail a person because of politics, and decide that those who accuse another person of crimes yet offer no proof, nor can find any real proof, will suffer the consequences of their actions in fines, legal fees and jail time. If we had a law like that I doubt the left would be able to pull stunts like this so easily.
The accusations made against Kavanaugh would never stand up in a court of law, yet the National Socialist Party and the media have convicted him, and actively searched for any other person who might be convinced to make a claim against him – never mind the second accusation is worse than Ford’s.
This action against Thomas as well as against Kavanaugh are Ted Kennedy’s legacy. May he rot.
The stupid party has let this go on. Thomas and Kav have testosterone in their system The Republicans….very low T, if any at all.
The Democrats are fighting a war, and will do anything to win, delay, or impede their enemies — while the Republicans are more interested in playing to the press, trying to portray themselves as compassionate, caring and nice people.
The Rs seem to be too stupid to understand that the press is going to vilify them and support their opponents, whatever they do. If they don’t smarten up and take care of business, they won’t be in charge much longer. Grassley should lose his chairmanship for gross stupidity. When this woman failed to respond by the Friday deadline, he should have put an end to this farce — they’ll play and delay forever, if he’s stupid enough to let them.
I agree with all that you wrote but there is another factor: The Republican Caucus includes undependable members who should have been Democrats, e.g., Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, Bob Corker, Jeff Flake, and the War Hero who no longer lives to have a microphone in his face.
And then you have “Chicom” Mitch who was stupid enough to help spend $30 Million to interfere in the Senate Race of Alabama and managed to lose Jeff Sessions’ seat for the first time in decades to Demtard, Doug Jones, narrowing further his majority. You just can’t fix stupid.
What a man Clarence Thomas is!
This is the proper response to the Leftist’s attempts to smear and destroy based on innuendo and outright lies. Don’t be polite, don’t be patient: show outright the indignity of the Senators actions of the Democrat Party. Be forceful in the denial, and take the Committee Democrat Members to task publicly for their blind acceptance of what is showing itself to be an obviously fabricated set of claims.
Given Judge Kavanaugh’s letter to Chairman Grassley, I’m hoping that he makes a similar speech as Justice Thomas did to the Committee on Thursday.
Bonus points if Judge Kavanaugh can work in Senator “Spartacus” Booker’s self-admitted groping of a 15 year old, along with a statement of something like “who the Hell are all of you to Judge ME, when Cory Booker gets to sit up there with you Democrat members after self-admitting to molesting a 15 year old. All the people who are the alleged witnesses of my alleged bad acts say they did not occur. What’s Sen. Booker’s excuse?”
Gee, wasn’t it wonderful when Democrats brought their snakes to the actual hearings, instead of waiting until they’re over and stuffing them in a fake can of peanuts and asking us to unscrew the top while they giggle? Ah, the good ol’ days.
Some people can only use reason and come across as a robot. Others can only use emotion and come across as a choleric two-year-old. Thomas paired emotion with reason flawlessly and was able to defend himself to the fullest.
I remember being a ignorant jackass when he was nominated, thinking Bush just did that because he’s black and Thurgood Marshall retired. Since that stupid time of my life, I have read so many of his decisions and heard him speak in person and have nothing but admiration for his intellect and wisdom.
Thank you for posting this.
I hope that Thomas is coaching Kavanaugh, because his TV appearance was not all that great.
It may simply be a case of keeping your powder dry for the kangaroo court to be held on Thursday. I hope he conveys his confusion and hurt at his accusers yet refrains from personal attacks against them, which is a tough thing to do.
I found him to be shell-shocked at this level of attack against him. He is a man of reason, measured justice, and he remains calm to an incredible degree given the hate filled attacks against him because he dares to look to uphold the rule of law over pushing politics.
Thomas also had his race work for him, and his outrage was justified, so he was able to shame his opposition to a degree. His speech was made incredible due to him personality.
Kavanaugh needs to remain his normal self, but when he has the opportunity, he needs to make sure that he talks about the rule of law being the bedrock of society, and these attacks, without substantiation from even their own named witnesses would be thrown out of court. He should call out Finestein for her actions in this, as well as Schumer and the majority of Democrats who stated they were against “him” before he was even nominated, just because Trump was the President who named him. I hope he can show he is the victim here, of malicious and hateful attacks against the very person he is, without theatrics and attacks against his accusers for anything other than their lies, or misguided beliefs, which they are ascribing to him.
Given the venue of Fox, and the interviewer, it was just putting out a few talking points. I wonder, given his obvious intelligence, if this was to goad Ford to show up, which I am still not sure will happen. Having her come in and deliver her attack in person gives him the opportunity to respond, and hopefully rip her accusations apart.
I especially liked Thomas in Raich.
And the left is STILL unpersoning Clarence Thomas to this day.
In the National Museum of African American History and Culture, Thomas DID NOT HAVE an exhibit. But Anita Hill did.
Somebody yesterday linked an excerpt from the NYT hack Maureen Dowd that actually explicitly called Thomas a ‘proven liar’.
These people are insane.
The left ignore the host of women who stood up for Thomas, and make out as if Anita Hill was railroaded. He made the unforgivable sin of being conservative instead of remaining on the Democrat plantation.
I hope that Kavanaugh can somehow refer to Thomas’s own travails brought by the same party as he is facing. That he can point out this is the same tactic that was tried against Thomas, all because of the party he was nominated by.
Two good men, from all that I can see, who have been put through hell, have had lies told against them, for political purposes. The National Socialist Democratic party is a party of hatred.
Isn’t it ironic that Bad Touch Biden chaired that inquisition?
All the commenters here had good points:
– Brett should study this.
– Thomas played this well, both reason and emotion. He pulled no punches
– I had forgotten the specifics, but it is a powerful reminder of the left’s tactics 30 years ago. Nothing has changed
– Biden smirking at the table as creepy as ever
– Thomas is one of the great Justices
– the left still slanders him to this day
– Kavanaugh may not be able to call it a high tech lynching of an uppity black, but he can point out the hypocrisy of a body of legislators who settled over 300+ Incidents of sexual harassment quietly with taxpayer money without consequence trying to manufacture a case against him and say he is not qualified . I hope he finds an eloquent way to do so
Awe I dunno Princeton…I reckon it would be just as powerful to say it the way you have written it!
I bet a dollar to a dime she never shows up.
Then as now I believed Clarence Thomas was a man of honesty and integrity and that Anita Hill was a lying skank.
I would apply the same words to Ford and all of her ilk and to Judge Kavanaugh.
I suspect that Anita Hill was paid well for her attempt; perhaps by a scumbag like George Soros. She got book deals and others to cover the payments. That’s how it’s done: A Book Signing Deal is made public noting a large sum of money, e.g., https://nypost.com/2017/03/28/why-the-obamas-got-big-bucks-for-their-book-deal/
But whether a book is written or not, they get the money and I’d bet that some billionaire liberal anarchist would front the money via an investment in the Publishers stock to make sure they get the money that unless concealed as a legitimate business deal, may draw unwanted attention. Can we imagine the Gift Taxes to be paid on a $65 Million Gift to the Obamas from somebody like Soros?
The Clintons supposedly left the White House broke, but got a book signing deal and then after being in the Obama Administration and in position to sell favors, they are all of a sudden rich while using a Charitable Foundation as a repository.
This is what Sen. Grassley should have said last week, along with a clear and affirming statement that such a circus will never be permitted on his watch and that the committee vote will proceed as planned – and staring daggers at Sen. Flake while he said it.
You pull weeds out by the roots, before they can grow.
If only Justice Thomas had sued Anita Hill for defamation and slander, then this latest despicable attempt may have proven to be too painful to attempt.
President Trump is correct: Our Defamation and Slander Laws need to be updated because awful people like Chrissy Ford and Anita Hill escape with impunity their claims without the accused getting Due Process and being Innocent Until Proven Guilty WITH EVIDENCE PRODUCED IN A COURT OF LAW. Pain Promotes Change and until these people feel the sting of being a fraudulent accuser, it will continue to happen again.
If Thomas had sued Hill he would have lost, badly. And he would have supported that verdict.
To prevail in a defamation suit he’d have to prove Hill was lying. The moment he becomes the accuser and she the accused, the burden of proof shifts. Instead of the onus being on her to prove her accusations, it’s on him to disprove them, and that’s almost impossible.
And our defamation laws are the way they are because we have a first amendment, so “updating” them would probably require a constitutional amendment.
The burden of proof is borne by the ACCUSER and NOT the Accused who has the presumption of innocense until proven guilty with EVEIDNECE.
Anita Hill having made the slanderous claim, had the burden to prove all the garbage that she asserted and she could not, obviously; she didn’t even have a corroborating party to confirm her allegations.
Here is just one example: https://abcnews.go.com/Business/jury-awards-13-million-texas-defamation-suit-anonymous/story?id=16194071
YOU OBVIOUSLY DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT.