Republican/Tea Party Supreme Court Justice Violates Law!

Conservative/Tea Party Supreme Thomas submitted fraudlent financial disclosures for years. Is it time for impeachment?

http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4741359

Thomas previously completed the disclosure correctly, but for the past several years he has not reported his wife's income as he is required to do. He said he was "confused". For many years he was not confused and then suddenly became confused. I mean this is a supreme court justice. Is it unreasonable to expect that he would understand the law?

His wife has been an active Tea Partier and receives a lot of money catering to right wing special interests. I think it is time the American people got a Supreme Court justice they can believe in and one that can understand the law.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Moot

I think presently it's a moot point. Impeachment of a Supreme Court Justice falls to the initiative of the United States House of Representatives.

Not going to happen for something like this.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Unfortunately that is true. But I think it is time to call for the impeachment of Thomas knowing full well that Republican/Tea Party House will fail do draft articles of impeachment.

I think it is high time the shenanigans of the Tea Party/Republican supremes be exposed. The American people deserve to know more about their supremes.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Not yet ... but ....

Not yet. Sunshine is the best disinfectant. No matter how strong-willed we might imagine him, Justice Thomas is not delusional about it. If his credibility sustains enough blows, he will be keenly aware of the context of scrutiny about his any opinions or dissents he authors.

Certainly there ought to be some discussion about this, since disclosure issues both greater and lesser have destroyed candidacies, earned reprimands, and ruined careers. Where does this fall in the spectrum, and how do its implications compare to other cases?

 

How the heck did guys like Thomas get to the supreme court anyway? Thomas is a disgrace to the nation.

 

Nor should it.

The offense for impeachment of a SCJ is the same as for the President, and making a mistake (even if it is hard for some to believe it was a mistake) on a filing form, when EVERYONE in the Justice Dept knows that his wife makes money each year, would certainly not rise to the level of "high crimes and misdemanors" as understood by the writers of the Constitution.

And not only would the House not bring charges, you would never get a Super Majority of the Senate to go along with such sillyness.

Arthur

 

So then why did Republicans impeach Clinton for lying about having an affair. Clinton made a misreprentation and was impeached and so did Thomas.

The unpleasant bottom line for you is either Thomas is an idiot or he falsified information on a legal document neither is acceptable in a supreme court justice...unless of course he happens to be a Tea Partier.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

And it is odd that before 5 years ago, Thomas understood how to fill out the legal document.

Tea Party/Republican advocates Hypocrisy is thy name.

 

No, Clinton didn't make a "misrepresntation".

He LIED UNDER OATH at a criminal trial in order to conceal an affair he was having, in other words, he lied for his own personal gain.

For which he was impeached.

For which he was DISBARRED from practicing law in his home state, fined $25,000 dollars and also disbarred from presenting cases to the Supreme Court.

If, and that's a BIG IF, you could show that Thomas not only did this on purpose but ALSO did this for personal gain, then you would have a case.

So far no one has alleged any basis for the important SECOND aspect of Thomas's improper filing.

Arthur

 

But did she report her income filing under "married filing separately" ? That can be done as well because he doesn't have to include her income along with his as long as they file separate returns stating so.

 

They tried; the impeachment failed.

I guess I'm one or the other. I wrote an article for a technology magazine one year and made a few hundred bucks for it. Completely forgot about it a year later, and got fined for not reporting it on my 1040.

 

No, Clinton really was impeached, just not convicted.

Thomas' oversight has undermined trust in the judicial system, there is no choice but to impeach. He quite literally lied, presenting false witness to his wife's income, that amounts to a misdemeanor.

 

Here's a relevant sentence:
"Bill Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on charges of perjury and obstruction of justice on December 19, 1998, but acquitted by the Senate on February 12, 1999. Two other impeachment articles, a second perjury charge and a charge of abuse of power, failed in the House."

from this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton

 

This and That

This isn't a tax issue. It's a federal service disclosure issue. Apparently—perhaps in his advancing age—Justice Thomas suddenly forgot for multiple years how to fill out a form that he had filled out correctly in the past. And it's an understandable error. When asked how much money his wife made, he checked "none".

It's quite clearly an innocent mistake. After all, we would be well above our station in life to presume that a Supreme Court Justice ought to be able to tell the difference between nothing and something.

• • •​

Filling out forms incorrectly has long been a disqualifier for service in the federal government. Maybe you haven't been paying attention to how many executive nominations to federal appointments over the last twenty years have been derailed by such issues.

Indeed, that's the reason I think the issue ought to be discussed. We invoke various standards of transgression inconsistently. I mean, sure, it's a laughable idea that this was just some innocent mistake. It would be hard to suggest this is an issue of advancing age, since we're talking about thirteen years worth of paperwork that, by some apparent quirk, are so hard to understand that, as Austin Bramwell writes in defense of Justice Thomas:

Yet the Times implies that Thomas failed to report $686,589 in income. Strictly speaking, that is true. But Thomas had no obligation to report $686,589 in income! At most, he was required to report merely that his wife had income, and identify the source.​

I agree with Bramwell that until this is shown to have some direct effect, impeachment talk is overstated. But some of the excuses conservatives are offering just slay me. Like Bramwell, reminding us how bloody simple the issue is when Thomas' excuse is that he was confused. He's a Justice of the United States Supreme Court. I just don't understand why the defense here is that he's such an idiot that he shouldn't be permitted anywhere near a bench.

See, the thing is that political careers have come undone over slightly more complicated things. Even beyond the stupidity and apathy shown by someone like the censured Rep. Rangel, it has long been an excuse for politicians with tax troubles that they screwed up because the tax code is so complicated and obscure. They were just confused, is all. And for many of them, that was insufficient to excuse them. This is not a new standard; it's been knocking off nominees and officials since the Clinton administration, at least.

But this isn't even that kind of excuse. In Justice Thomas' world, $686,589 = "none". He didn't just forget to include it, or fail to understand that it needed to be included, he proactively said it didn't exist.

Bramwell notes:

As it turns out, financial disclosures are required of federal judges under the Ethics in Government Act of 1978. Congress delegated to the Judicial Conference — i.e., a committee of federal judges led by the Chief Justice — responsibility for collecting the forms and making them available to the public. In other words, the judges themselves enforce the transparency requirements suggested by Congress. If the Judicial Conference learns of Thomas's lapse, what do you think it's going to do? Not even Common Cause can discern any harm to the public, nor could the Judicial Conference mete out any discipline in any case. All that that the Conference could do is ask Thomas to correct his disclosure forms, which he has already voluntarily done.​

If it turns out that there is some legitimate question about an Opinion or Dissent he wrote that is related to one of those income sources, then the whole question of Thomas' apparent crippling stupidity might become relevant. But his stupidity has never been enough to bring him down in the past; I don't see why it should in this occasion. Just ... you know ... remember that people aren't reassured when the explanation is that a guy is too damn stupid to figure out the difference between nothing and something.
____________________

Notes:

Bramwell, Austin. "Thomas' Financial Forms: No Scandal Here". FrumForum. January 25, 2011. FrumForum.com. January 25, 2011. http://www.frumforum.com/thomas-financial-forms-no-scandal-here

 

If Thomas's mental abilities have deteroriated that much that he can no longer answer a simple straight forward question; then he no longer deserves a seat on the supremes.

And if one buys into the idea that Thomas is not a complete idiot; why did he feel it advantageous to not disclose more than 600k dollars in income from a Conservative advocacy group?

 

Which is what I said.

Indeed, he could get a speeding ticket, and that would be "violating the law" but it wouldn't lead to impeachment either.

The bar for impeachment in the House is pretty high.
The bar for conviction in the Senate is VERY high.

Arthur

 

They are appointed for life.
There is no annual competency test.

Arthur

 

So are you admitting he is a complete idiot?

 

Nope, nor have you shown him to be.

Arthur

 

LOL, but by your standards Christine O'Donnell is a genius.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Never once made that claim.

But unlike you, I bet she probably can spell GENIUS.

Arthur