June 10, 2011- In the course of human events, most people give politicians and public figures a second chance when they make a mistake in judgment because, as the saying goes, “to err is human” and everyone makes at least one mistake in their lives. When politicians make mistakes they face any number of consequences ranging from censure to removal from office, and in many cases, they resign in disgrace only to become lobbyists for right-wing organizations. When a Supreme Court Justice makes a mistake though, there is little recourse because they were granted lifetime employment after going through sometimes grueling confirmation hearings. There is one particular Justice who was fortunate to be confirmed and there is ample evidence that he should be removed for judicial malfeasance and criminal activity.
Clarence Thomas’s confirmation hearing gave a glimpse into the character of a slimy sexual predator who does not deserve to sit on a park bench much less the highest court in the land. In his confirmation hearing there was an allegation of a sexual nature that the predominately male Senate glossed over because they were apt to dismiss an accusation of misconduct made by a woman. However, Justice Thomas’s sexual predation pales in comparison to his misconduct since sitting on the nation’s highest court, and as evidence mounts that he is tainted by allegiance to neo-conservatives who are striving to dismantle the government, it is time for his impeachment, trial, conviction, and removal as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court.
There are allegations that Thomas “engaged in judicial corruption” by receiving $100,000 in support from Citizens United during his nomination in 1991. The group ProtectOurElections.org claims that Thomas repaid Citizens United on a quid pro quo in 2010’s Citizens United ruling that allows corporations and unions to donate unrestricted amounts to candidates without naming their contributors. The ruling has had a major detrimental impact on elections and the Citizens United Foundation financial support to put Thomas on the Supreme Court shows an obvious conflict of interest by Thomas. Of course, Thomas dismisses the allegation of judicial misconduct because he has the backing and support of the Republican Party who are also in the employ of Koch Industries, Americans for Prosperity, The Heritage Foundation and myriad other neo-conservative groups working to privatize the United States government.
Thomas also deliberately failed to report his wife Ginny’s income from the Heritage Foundation on financial disclosure forms from 2003-2007. She earned $680,000 during the four year period and it turns out that Thomas failed to report the source of his wife’s income for two decades; he only amended the reports after Common Cause brought attention to Mrs. Thomas’s earnings from the Heritage Foundation. However, it is not just the failure to report the earnings that give the appearance of judicial misconduct. It is his wife’s involvement with a teabagger group that taints Thomas’s judicial standing and may indeed be the most damning.
Thomas’s wife’s employment with Liberty Central, a teabagger organization she co-founded in January 2009 is “dedicated to opposing” what she characterizes as “the leftist tyranny of President Obama and Democrats in Congress.” On the Liberty Central website, Mrs. Thomas assures potential clients that she will use her “experience and connections” to assist them with “governmental affairs efforts” and political donation strategies. Some of Mrs. Thomas’s connections are with Dick Armey, the terrorist-funding leader of FreedomWorks that is a teabagger group founded with funding supplied by the Koch brothers. It is the connection with Kochs that brings into question Thomas’s judicial malfeasance regardless of his wife’s involvement with FreedomWorks, Dick Armey, or the teabaggers.
The teabagger opposition to the Affordable Health Act is common knowledge, but the involvement of Dick Armey and FreedomWorks funding and training teabag efforts to defeat the health law with Koch money, although well-documented, is hardly public knowledge. Mrs. Thomas was a paid activist for conservative groups opposed to the Affordable Health Act and she openly advertises her “experience and connections” to overturn the law of the land. The health law is being challenged on multiple fronts in the judicial system and the hopes are that it will be brought before the Supreme Court for a ruling that it is unconstitutional. Clarence Thomas has a direct connection to the group opposing the law, and it is not only his wife’s involvement that is his problem.
Thomas and Antonin Scalia attended secret policy meetings held by Koch Industries prior to the Citizens United decision and one of the missions of those meetings was combating the threat of “nationalization of healthcare” as well as unions, climate and energy regulations, and financial regulations. The meetings are strategy and policy sessions that are sponsored and driven by the American Enterprise Institute as well as the Heritage Foundation. The question is; did Thomas take direction on how to vote on the constitutionality of the Health law? Based on his wife’s involvement and Thomas’s attendance at the strategy sessions, it appears he either was told how to vote, or gave instructions to the opponents of the health law in how best to present their case to the High Court.