The Weiner vs. The Pubic Hair

[Howey]

Which was worse? Anthony Weiner broke no laws, he just lied about a personal matter.

Supreme Court Justice Thomas, who had his own troubles, isn't just lying.

Where's the Republican's demanding he resign from the Court?

The two men met in the mid-1990s, a few years after Justice Thomas joined the court. Since then, Mr. Crow has done many favors for the justice and his wife, Virginia, helping finance a Savannah library project dedicated to Justice Thomas, presenting him with a Bible that belonged to Frederick Douglass and reportedly providing $500,000 for Ms. Thomas to start a Tea Party-related group. They have also spent time together at gatherings of prominent Republicans and businesspeople at Mr. Crow’s Adirondacks estate and his camp in East Texas.
 
In several instances, news reports of Mr. Crow’s largess provoked controversy and questions, adding fuel to a rising debate about Supreme Court ethics. But Mr. Crow’s financing of the museum, his largest such act of generosity, previously unreported, raises the sharpest questions yet — both about Justice Thomas’s extrajudicial activities and about the extent to which the justices should remain exempt from the code of conduct for federal judges.

Although the Supreme Court is not bound by the code, justices have said they adhere to it. Legal ethicists differed on whether Justice Thomas’s dealings with Mr. Crow pose a problem under the code.

[uselesslegs]

A lot of justices and their wives/husbands have been involved in activities/pursuits outside of the positions of Justice.  Some political in nature, some charitable, some community involvement, some raising awareness...BUT...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it's grossly inappropriate to be so directly linked to ventures that seek to remove and "defame" the sitting POTUS. I can say defame because there are "tea parties" (since all claim to be united, but do so through individual cells...hmmmmm), who say any number of wonderful things about the President that are meant to imply "enemy of the state."  

Terrorist sympathizer, Dictator, Muslim (as in extremist), on and on and on.  It's completely Unethical and if Thomas' wife will not stop her intense campaign against the President...then Thomas should remove himself.

[ekg]

Imagine the insanity if Thomas was Dem and his wife was the head of 'Move on' or 'Rock the Vote'..

[Howey]

A lot of justices and their wives/husbands have been involved in activities/pursuits outside of the positions of Justice.  Some political in nature, some charitable, some community involvement, some raising awareness...BUT...I'm gonna go out on a limb and say that it's grossly inappropriate to be so directly linked to ventures that seek to remove and "defame" the sitting POTUS. I can say defame because there are "tea parties" (since all claim to be united, but do so through individual cells...hmmmmm), who say any number of wonderful things about the President that are meant to imply "enemy of the state."  

Terrorist sympathizer, Dictator, Muslim (as in extremist), on and on and on.  It's completely Unethical and if Thomas' wife will not stop her intense campaign against the President...then Thomas should remove himself.

It's happened before. But back then it was a Democrat SC justice who resigned under pressure from Nixon.

If this sounds familiar, it’s because America has seen this movie before. Indeed, the Thomas scandal is little more than a remake of the forty year-old gifting scandal that brought down Justice Abe Fortas. Like Thomas, Fortas liked to associate with wealthy individuals with potential business before his Court. And like Thomas, Fortas took inappropriate gifts from his wealthy benefactors.
 
Fortas’ questionable gifts first came out when President Johnson nominated him for a promotion to Chief Justice of the United States in 1968. Fortas had accepted $15,000 to lead seminars at American University — far more than the university normally paid for such services — and the payments were bankrolled by the leaders of frequent corporate litigants including the vice president of Phillip Morris. Fortas survived this revelation, although his nomination for the Chief Justiceship was filibustered into oblivion.
 
Just a year later, the country learned that Fortas took another highly questionable gift. In 1966, one year after Fortas joined the Court, stock speculator Louis E. Wolfson’s foundation began paying Fortas an annual retainer of $20,000 per year for consulting services. Fortas’ actions were legal, and he eventually returned the money after Wolfson was convicted of securities violations and recused himself from Wolfson’s case, but the damage to Fortas — and the potential harm to the Supreme Court’s reputation — were too great. Fortas resigned in disgrace.
 
It is difficult to distinguish Fortas’ scandal from Thomas’. Like Fortas, Thomas accepted several very valuable gifts from parties who are frequently interested in the outcome of federal court cases. One of Thomas’ benefactors has even filed briefs in his Court since giving Thomas a $15,000 gift, and Thomas has not recused himself from each of these cases.
 
Of course, Thomas is also the least likely Justice to actually follow the command of precedent. Thomas embraces a discredited theory of the Constitution which would return America to a time when federal child labor laws were considered unconstitutional. His fellow justices criticize him for showing “utter disregard for our precedent and Congress’ intent.” Even ultra-conservative Justice Antonin Scalia finds Thomas’ approach to the law too extreme — in Scalia’s words “I am a textualist. I am an originalist. I am not a nut.”
 
But Thomas’ disregard for what has come before him changes nothing about the precedent he faces. If Abe Fortas had to resign his seat, so too should Clarence Thomas.

[uselesslegs]

It's happened before/url]. But back then it was a Democrat SC justice who resigned under pressure from Nixon.

That proves the point in my mind.  If the action's are (and continue to be) inappropriate, even by association...ya gotta go.

[Howey]

That proves the point in my mind.  If the action's are (and continue to be) inappropriate, even by association...ya gotta go.

So why isn't he gone?

[Howey]

Seems like my friend Steve Benen reads Our Town:

http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/clarence_thomas_abe_fortas_pro030372.php

The controversies aren’t identical, of course, but given the scope of Thomas’ connection to Crow, the generosity Crow has shown towards Thomas, and the fact that Crow has business before the federal judiciary, there are parallels.

At a minimum, it doesn’t inspire confidence in Thomas’ integrity as a justice. In January, we learned that Thomas was required to report his wife’s income on his financial disclosure forms, but for several years, for reasons that remain unclear, he chose not to. A month later, reports surfaced that Thomas may have lied about his role at a political retreat for wealthy conservatives, organized by the right-wing Koch Brothers, where participants discussed legal strategies for overturning campaign finance laws — laws that Thomas later ruled on. His wife’s bizarre right-wing activism and lobbying efforts have also raised eyebrows.

And now this.

I’d still love to know what the reaction would be if Thomas were a liberal justice appointed by a Democratic president. Just how loud would the calls from the right for his resignation be? How many hearings would Senate Republicans hold? How many “special reports” would Fox News run?[/quote]

[ekg]

So why isn't he gone?

I had a mini-epiphany about this.. and weiner-gate.

Thomas isn't gone, nor is Vitter and the likes because they are the 'moral' party.. the 'family values' party.. now we know this, of course, but the mini-epiphany is.. they aren't holding themselves to any morals or family value, they are only holding Dems and Liberals to them...

It's more than just the 'do as I say, not as I do' mantra the folks in the GOP live by..  They lie in their news, but accuse the Liberal media as being the skewered news source. They cheat on their wives and pick up men in airport bathrooms, but call liberal men who send sexy texts deviants and perverts. The gather around and worship the likes of James O'keefe, but accuse the MSM of asking such 'Gotcha' questions as 'what do you like to read' and 'how was your vacation'.  Dick Cheney can say Deficits don't matter.. but today he when calls Obama a destroyer of the USA because he has Cheney's deficits!, it's ok..because...They are OUR moral police, not theirs.  They need for someone to live up to their moral and family values, and since they can't.. they force us to and that allows them the freedom to do as they please..

So you see, we police ourselves and let them police us at the same time.. They are borg, but they are also our overlord... and we're just too 'moral' and our values are too high to do anything about it..

[Howey]

Thats why I  say the dems should pull off their gloves and fight fire with fire,

Where the hell is Alan Grayson when we need him?

[Howey]

Please sign!

http://www.chrismurphy.com/page/s/scotus-ethics-hearings

[ekg]

done