« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Calling It Like I See It; Weiner’s Attempted “Lynching” of Justice Thomas

Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY) and 73 other Democrats put out a letter "asking" (demanding) that Associate Justice Clarence Thomas recuse himself from any Obamacare Supreme Court deliberations. According to the piece, letter author Weiner is responding to a suggestion Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT) made last week that new Associate Justice Elena Kagan recuse herself since her previous job was to run the office that determines the legal position of and represents the federal government before the Supreme Court in various cases:

"I think that Kagan, who was the solicitor general at the time this was all done, probably should recuse herself, which means it might not be resolved by the Supreme Court," Hatch told Fox News last week. "That means the lower court decision will be the acting law."

It wasn’t a mystery that Obamacare would be challenged in court, and that the legality would be decided by the Supreme Court. Before being nominated to the Court, it would have been the office Kagan led that would defend Obamacare before that body; although there is no evidence she had anything to do with preparing the government’s eventual case, Hatch’s argument is there could be a conflict of interest.

That’s the claim from Weiner and the 73 Democrats. Come on, we know what this is. It has nothing to do with Obamacare (which has nothing to do with health care), or even the Citizens United case mentioned in the letter. Weiner mentions the liberal group Common Cause, the group that wants to have Eric Holder’s Justice Department investigate Thomas and fellow Associate Justice Antonin Scalia for not recusing themselves during the Citizens United deliberations (both ruled in the majority). Common Cause also leads protests. One of their recent protests was at a meeting of conservatives run by the Koch Brothers; they even included videos of the protests. But not all of the videos.

This video (via the Washington Times) has come out before, but it bears repeating [content warning: language]:

This video didn’t show up on the Common Cause website. In an update to Kerry Picket’s post, Common Cause says they condemn the racism and misogyny of those at the rally. They also make this claim:

Further, it did not reflect the reality of the rally, which was peaceful, respectful and attended by parents and children and senior citizens alike. Anyone who has attended a public event has encountered people whose ideas or acts misrepresent or embarrass the gathering. The shooter of this video captured only that fringe.

Funny, those who call the Tea Party racist don’t have a problem tying everyone in the movement with the fringe elements that could be racist (even that has yet to be proven, while we have visual evidence of the racism at the Common Cause event). So as far as I’m concerned, this statement by Common Cause is nothing more than an attempt to hide the group members’ real racism against conservatives who are black and their real misogyny against conservatives who are women.

It’s possible that Weiner and the 73 other miscreant Democrats who signed this letter haven’t seen the video; it’s more then likely they would simply deny they saw it to avoid any potential fallout. The problem is the video, and all the hate within, exists. And it came at a Common Cause rally, the same Common Cause Weiner cites in his letter. At least Common Cause had the sense to go after both Thomas and Scalia; Weiner and the Democrats go after Thomas alone.

And look at the "charges" Weiner makes:

  • Thomas and his wife could financially benefit if Obamacare is overturned (so would the rest of the Supreme Court members, and their families)
  • Thomas’ supposed failure to disclose his wife receiving nearly $700,000 from Obamacare opponents The Heritage Foundation (she received the money long before Obamacare was passed)
  • Ginny Thomas’ group received funds from corporations not involved in the Citizens United ruling, but because they were corporations, those corporations benefited from the ruling, and so did Ginny Thomas’ group

Aaron Worthing conducts an excellent smackdown of Weiner and the other miscreants for their letter, explaining in detail how ridiculous and frivolous, and misogynistic, these “charges” are.

Just as it was during Justice Thomas’ confirmation hearings, Democrats are lining up to lynch the black guy who doesn’t adhere to the Democratic Party’s rules that Americans who are black must follow the dictates of and only vote for members of the Democratic Party. Additionally, equality for women is not to be extended to women who are conservatives, like Ginny Thomas; Democrats believe it is the job of conservative women to be home and keep quiet. Democrats’ treatment of Sarah Palin, Michelle Bachmann, and other conservatives is proof of that.

Like I said, I’m just calling it like I see it.

Addendum 1: I’m of the belief that waging a political war against an enemy who fights dirty, as Weiner and these Democrats are doing, should be met the same way. They have nothing on Thomas. Nothing. They aren’t sending letters to Justices Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Kennedy, Breyer, Ginsburg, Sotomayor, or Kagan; they only sent a letter to Clarence Thomas. Since we know the “charges” brought by Weiner are nothing, there is only one difference between Thomas and all the other Supreme Court Justices. This letter is a proverbial “lynching” of that Justice.

Addendum 2: By contrast, Hatch’s suggestion that Justice Kagan recuse herself is due solely to the fact that her previous job was as U.S. Solicitor General, whose job function I described earlier. She is unique among all the Justices on the Court; none of the other present Justices had anything to do with the passage of Obamacare, none of the other present Justices served as U.S. Solicitor General, and none of the other present Justices had anything to do with possibly preparing for Obamacare’s defense before the Court. With that said, I haven’t seen any evidence from anyone, including Hatch, that definitively shows Kagan had any involvement with the passage of Obamacare or preparing for its defense, so it’s likely that Hatch’s suggestion is also nothing. But his suggestion isn’t due to anything other than Kagan’s previous position in the Obama administration.

Addendum 3: There can be no charge of hypocrisy against Orrin Hatch with his suggestion. He voted against confirming Kagan. Had he voted for her knowing Obamacare court challenges to the Supreme Court would eventually come up while she was a member, that would be one thing. But he didn’t.

Get Alerts