Image 01 Image 03

Democrats’ Forever War On Justice Clarence Thomas Ramps Up

Democrats’ Forever War On Justice Clarence Thomas Ramps Up

Latest salvo is overblown claim about Justice Thomas not reporting trips on a conservative billionaire’s private jet and visits to his vacation home – but those trips were not reportable until the law was recently changed.

public domain

I think it’s fair to say that there is no one Democrats hate more than Justice Clarence Thomas.

But Trump you shout. Fair enough, but they’ve been hating and attacking Clarence Thomas since 1991, Trump is a relatively new-found object of hate. Also, they hate Trump (and every other potential Republican nominee) because he’s a threat to their political power; they hate Thomas at a much more visceral, gut level, because as a Black conservative he represents a threat to the core of their race-baiting being.

So the war on Clarence Thomas is a forever war. That forever war is energized by Democrats’ frustration that the U.S. Supreme Court is the one major national institution that the left does not control. So what they can’t control, they must destroy.

Hence the calls long before the abortion decision for court-packing and investigations of conservative Justices, and the open instigation of violence resulting in an assassination attempt against Justice Kavanaugh. Amazing how that’s been memory-holed, isn’t it?

The latest salvo was fired by ProPublica, in an article about the Thomas’s relationship with conservative donor Harlan Crowe. The article suggests some impropriety, Clarence Thomas and the Billionaire:

IN LATE JUNE 2019, right after the U.S. Supreme Court released its final opinion of the term, Justice Clarence Thomas boarded a large private jet headed to Indonesia. He and his wife were going on vacation: nine days of island-hopping in a volcanic archipelago on a superyacht staffed by a coterie of attendants and a private chef.

If Thomas had chartered the plane and the 162-foot yacht himself, the total cost of the trip could have exceeded $500,000. Fortunately for him, that wasn’t necessary: He was on vacation with real estate magnate and Republican megadonor Harlan Crow, who owned the jet — and the yacht, too.

For more than two decades, Thomas has accepted luxury trips virtually every year from the Dallas businessman without disclosing them, documents and interviews show….

Sounds bad, huh? Except nothing in the ProPublica article demonstrates that it was unlawful to hop on a friend’s private jet to vacation at his private home.

The only possible hook ProPublica had was non-disclosure:

These trips appeared nowhere on Thomas’ financial disclosures. His failure to report the flights appears to violate a law passed after Watergate that requires justices, judges, members of Congress and federal officials to disclose most gifts, two ethics law experts said. He also should have disclosed his trips on the yacht, these experts said.

There’s no evidence of a quid pro quo, and Crow had no business before the Supreme Court. Is it really a shock that Justice Thomas hangs out with conservatives?

The claim that the value of the trips was reportable is hotly disputed. The Wall Street Journal argued in an editorial:

The left’s assault on the Supreme Court is continuing, and the latest front is the news that Justice Clarence Thomas has a rich friend who has hosted the Justice on his private plane, his yacht, and his vacation resort. That’s it. That’s the story. Yet this non-bombshell has triggered breathless claims that the Court must be investigated, and that Justice Thomas must resign or be impeached. Those demands give away the real political game here….

The ProPublica writers suggest that Justice Thomas may have violated ethics rules, and they quote a couple of cherry-picked ethicists to express their dismay.

But it seems clear that the Court’s rules at the time all of this happened did not require that gifts of personal hospitality be disclosed. This includes the private plane trips. ProPublica fails to make clear to readers that the U.S. Judicial Conference recently changed its rules to require more disclosure. The new rules took effect last month.
Justice Thomas would have been obliged to disclose gifts that posed a conflict of interest involving cases that would be heard by the High Court. But there is no evidence that Mr. Crow has had any such business before the Court, and Mr. Crow says he has “never asked about a pending or lower court case.”

The most ProPublica can come up with is that “Crow has deep connections in conservative politics.” Oh dear….

Justice Thomas said in a Friday statement that “early in my tenure at the court, I sought guidance from my colleagues and others in the judiciary, and was advised that this sort of personal hospitality from close personal friends, who did not have business before the Court, was not reportable.” He added that “these guidelines are now being changed,” as the Judicial Conference announced new guidance. “And, it is, of course, my intent to follow this guidance in the future,” the statement said.

Attorney Leslie McAddoo Gordon has an detailed Twitter thread confirming that there was no disclosure required (though there may be under recently adopted rules). Read the whole thread, here are some key parts of it:

Others have pointed out that the arguments against Thomas are weak at best:

Even Sheldon “dark money” Whitehouse, who has been on a jihad against conservative Justices for years, admits only recent changes would require Thomas to report – an admission he violated no rule or law.

In a completely sleazy and fraudulent move (I know, you’re *shocked*) Democrats are claiming Crow is a Nazi sypmathizer because he has Nazi memorabilia at his home – but in fact he collect memorabilia of all sorts of totalitarian and repressive regimes to demonstrate the dangers:

None of that has stopped the liars and smear merchants:

These are bad people. I’m approaching Jason Whitlock territory, “We Can’t Find Common Ground” With The Left, Need To Go “Our Separate Ways”.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Sotomayor dines with Schumer and Pelosi. Hum…. Two branches of government chowing down. Small talk I bet.

    Concise in reply to alaskabob. | April 10, 2023 at 10:05 am

    We’re not talking about the sharpest tools in the shed for any of the above, but Schumer could confidently assume the mantle of smartest guy at the table during that dinner.

    Milhouse in reply to alaskabob. | April 11, 2023 at 7:06 pm

    It may well be small talk. There is a very long history of personal friendships between members of different branches. Of course presidents have congressmen and justices over for dinner all the time. And in FDR’s day the Chief Justice used to visit the White House every week to play poker.

    Even better, for a short time in 1809 the Chief Justice was also Secretary of State! (No, separation of powers is not in the constitution. It is perfectly lawful for someone to hold a position in both branches, except that congressmen can’t hold appointed positions in the executive branch. They can serve as president or vice president, because those are elected positions. And they can be justices too. The only reason nobody has done it since 1809 is because the workload would be insane. And that one case only happened because it was for a very short time, and as a personal favor to the president.

“The article you posted also admits it’s an “ethics loophole” AKA he didn’t violate any ethics rules.”

“Ah — so you call it a “loophole” when the government still allows you some freedom.”

“Just so I understand, there are folks out there arguing that it’s fine that a Supreme Court justice’s billionaire benefactor is also a fan of Nazi stuff, because he’s a fan of Nazi stuff in the good way?”

Says the dips*t who licks the boots of a press secretary who rocks a hammer-and-sickle hat.

    BierceAmbrose in reply to henrybowman. | April 10, 2023 at 7:59 pm

    Yeah, “loophole.”

    Wouldn’t it be nice if they wrote solid laws vs. leaving “loopholes? One wonders are they incompetent at crafting laws, or competent at leaving holes for their clients?

The Gentle Grizzly | April 9, 2023 at 10:43 pm

What the Democrats are saying is, “that boy needs to learn his place”.

I think they started attacking Justice Thomas because the judge handling Trump’s case may have an ethics issue. Right after that news came out, all of a sudden this attack started on Thomas.

    Gosport in reply to james h. | April 11, 2023 at 1:53 pm

    The problem with that theory is that they aren’t going to get Justice Thomas, just piss him off.

    “Never strike a king unless you are sure you shall kill him.” – Emerson

Her every congressman retires a multimillionaire

Apparently AOC is worth 16 million ? now pretty good for a bartenders wage and 4 years of Congress, or is the 3 really

    geronl in reply to gonzotx. | April 10, 2023 at 8:19 am

    She sold out rather quickly.

    Milhouse in reply to gonzotx. | April 11, 2023 at 7:09 pm

    No, you liar. AOC is not worth $16 million, or even $160,000.

      I just posted this in response to a comment in another thread, but I think it’s worth reposting here.


      This is untrue and appears to have originated at the leftist satire site “Dunning Kruger Times” (part of the Last Line of Defense network, a leftist operation) which for some reason some people on the right think is a real news site. It’s inexplicable given that they literally tell you everything they post is utter bunk, but some people believe it anyway and then share it like it’s true. So normal people end up believing it down the line (maybe this is you?). This site also appears to be where the lie about AOC becoming a multi-millionaire since entering Congress started.

      Here’s what this leftist site has to say about the rightwing idiots who gobble up their crap as if it’s real:

      “Taters” are the conservative fans of America’s Last Line of Defense. They are fragile, frightened, mostly older caucasian Americans. They believe nearly anything. While we go out of our way to educate them that not everything they agree with is true, they are still old, typically ignorant, and again — very afraid of everything.

      It’s right there on the site, but I guess there really are “taters” out there (and even here on our own pages). If you “heard” it anywhere other than on a credible site (such as LI), then it’s most likely not true. In fact, the more it comports with wild conspiracy theories rampaging on the fringes of right media, the less likely it is to be true (and it probably came from this Dunning Kruger site, one of the Last Line outlets, or one of the leftist sites working with them).

It’s only about power, it’s all about pursuit of power. Nothing else. The facts don’t matter to these people.

Once you realize this, nothing surprises you.

Every law they pass is just designed to increase the power of the state, the power to coerce, no matter how benign the stated intent.

Anyone who stands against their power, they will try to destroy.

Clarence Thomas has stood against them for decades, and with a conservative majority is in position to slow them temporarily, ergo they will try to destroy him as much as ever.

50 Shades of leveraging Mandela’s Xhosa vs Zulu with native collateral damage.

Steven Brizel | April 9, 2023 at 11:29 pm

This is purely and simply an attempt at intimidation of a conservative .Members of SCOTUS have a long history of not being questioned about what they do or which they spend their spare time either on the Georgetown Party circuit lecturing lobbying Presidents or even doing things which smack of displaying their point of view ala RBG who presided over a same gender ceremony

    BierceAmbrose in reply to Steven Brizel. | April 10, 2023 at 8:01 pm

    I await the DoJ’s action against these people, trying to influence a judge. Not holding my breath.

      Milhouse in reply to BierceAmbrose. | April 11, 2023 at 7:11 pm

      It’s not against the law to try to influence a judge. It’s against the law to demonstrate outside the courthouse or outside their homes with the intention of influencing a specific vote. But attempts to influence them in other ways are not only legal but should be presumed to be constitutionally protected until shown otherwise.

        BierceAmbrose in reply to Milhouse. | April 12, 2023 at 3:40 pm

        You left out threats of impeachment from legislative n party “leaders”; media hit pieces, threats to non-public life, friends, n family.

        That’s what we’re talking about here. Not amicus briefs. Would that that were so.

        I look forward to the DoJ’s action on these ingluence operations. Not hopeful, “prosecutorial discretion” and all. They’d be busy going after people calling out the FBI’s “insurrectionist LARPing” agents provacateur.

E Howard Hunt | April 9, 2023 at 11:54 pm

I’m waiting for Sheldon Whitehouse to reveal DNA evidence concerning what was on that Coke can.

If the left is so interested in public officials and private planes, yachts, and vacation resorts why haven’t we heard a peep out of them demanding release of the Epstein Island passenger lists?

For that matter, why hasn’t the DoJ released them?

Biden has vacationed at private homes of “friends” since he has been in office, let me guess these so-called “journalists” didn’t care.

Professional parasite Joe Biden has not only vacationed at private homes of “friends”, he got this party started when he presided over what the future justice famously called a “high-tech lynching.”.
Thus making Jackass Joe the first White man to ever attempt to lynch a Black man with a pubic hair!

I sometimes collect “Mr Peanut” memorabilia,
Does this put me in league with “Big Peanut” ?

If the Left didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.

And maybe Mr. Crowe just enjoys conversation and friendship with someone who has a gentle spirit, kind heart, and keen mind. And perhaps he’s led to show love and compassion to the justice for all the bu!!$h!t he’s had to put up with.

I wonder if rabid leftists have ever read the story of the good samaritan? If they ever contemplate the kind of compassionate heart that’s behind wading into the ditch to assist someone who has been savaged and dumped there?

I doubt he voted for Joe Biden. So he “ain’t black.”

BierceAmbrose | April 10, 2023 at 8:02 pm

They’re just envious their Billionaire friends don’t treat them so nicely. And after all that legislation,too.

BierceAmbrose | April 10, 2023 at 8:03 pm

“…because he’s a fan of Nazi stuff in the good way?”

No surprise these people don’t get “know your enemy”, or “learn from the past.” There’s this thing in corporate OD called “Skilled Incompetence.” Govt does it even better.

I’m curious…Did the democrat judges, presidents and politicians who accepted the multiple luxury trips to Epstein’s Pedo Island fill out financial disclosures? I guess we’ll never know, because the democrat-run FIB refuses to disclose their names.
Funny that