The Case for Impeaching Clarence Thomas

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Lakhota, Feb 19, 2018.

  1. Lakhota
    Offline

    Lakhota Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    65,662
    Thanks Received:
    7,726
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Native America
    Ratings:
    +34,531
    [​IMG]

    “The idea of someone so flagrantly telling untruths to ascend to the highest legal position in the U.S. remains shocking, in addition to its being illegal.”

    New York Magazine is laying out a case for the possible impeachment of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.

    The cover story, penned by former executive editor of The New York Times Jill Abramson, described Thomas’ rise to power and his apparent immunity to scrutiny during the height of the #MeToo movement. Citing conversations with three women who worked with Thomas, Abramson also detailed a history of lies told by the judge, beginning during his confirmation hearing.

    His dishonesty, not the allegations of impropriety, “raise the possibility of impeachment.”

    “Lying is, for lawyers, a cardinal sin. State disciplinary committees regularly institute proceedings against lawyers for knowingly lying in court, with punishments that can include disbarment. Since 1989, three federal judges have been impeached and forced from office for charges that include lying. The idea of someone so flagrantly telling untruths to ascend to the highest legal position in the U.S. remains shocking, in addition to its being illegal,” Abramson wrote.

    Abramson is the co-author of “Strange Justice: The Selling of Clarence Thomas,” a 1994 book about his controversial confirmation hearing. During the1991 hearing, former employee Anita Hill accused him of sexually harassing her. Hill alleged that Thomas talked about pornography in the workplace and regularly commented on the bodies of female coworkers.

    Thomas claimed he never talked to Hill about porn or to other women who worked with him about risqué subject matter.

    The hearing quickly turned into the epitome of a he-said, she-said, and despite the allegations, Thomas was later confirmed by a vote of 52-48. Since then, more women have come forward with similar claims about his behavior.

    Read the full story at New York magazine.

    More: New York Magazine Makes A Case For Impeaching Clarence Thomas

    I watched his confirmation hearing live. He should never have been confirmed. The evidence against him was overwhelming. There were more women waiting to testify against Thomas, but his "high-tech" lynching comment scared the shit out of Biden and Kennedy. So the remaining women were never called. However, Anita Hill's testimony alone should have been enough to end his ascension to SCOTUS. She was extremely credible.

    [​IMG]

     
    • Funny Funny x 8
    • Agree Agree x 2
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2018
  2. Lakhota
    Offline

    Lakhota Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    65,662
    Thanks Received:
    7,726
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Native America
    Ratings:
    +34,531
    • Funny Funny x 3
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2018
  3. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    40,569
    Thanks Received:
    5,331
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +18,607
    You're insane if you buy any of this.
     
    • Agree Agree x 6
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
    • Winner Winner x 2
  4. Lakhota
    Offline

    Lakhota Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    65,662
    Thanks Received:
    7,726
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Native America
    Ratings:
    +34,531
    Why? Give some "credible" reasons. I totally buy it. Even Biden knows he screwed up.
     
  5. Snouter
    Offline

    Snouter Can You Smell Me

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2013
    Messages:
    9,129
    Thanks Received:
    1,521
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +10,132
    That grotesque, like 90 year old Jewish creature really should be removed for attacking our democracy.
     
  6. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    40,569
    Thanks Received:
    5,331
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +18,607
    Of course you buy it. And Biden's off his rocker.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  7. gipper
    Offline

    gipper Libertarian/Anarchist

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    25,097
    Thanks Received:
    4,933
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Ratings:
    +26,055
    Good God Injun, wtf is wrong with you?

    If you remove lawyers who lie, you’d have to remove all politicians even your beloved Dems.

    Partisans are so silly.
     
    • Winner Winner x 6
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. Lakhota
    Offline

    Lakhota Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    65,662
    Thanks Received:
    7,726
    Trophy Points:
    1,870
    Location:
    Native America
    Ratings:
    +34,531
    Lying under oath for SCOTUS confirmation is a crime.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    40,569
    Thanks Received:
    5,331
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +18,607
    Call us when you have proof he lied.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. Soggy in NOLA
    Offline

    Soggy in NOLA Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    40,569
    Thanks Received:
    5,331
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Ratings:
    +18,607
    Gotta love it, a bunch of bimbos make insane allegations = he lied.
     

Share This Page