ding, ding, ding: Thomas conspires with wife & checked a box marking 'No Spousal Income'

[kpete]

New Information Reveals Thomas Invested In Lobbying Firm Tied To Tea Party and Engaged In "Judicial Insider Trading" To Enrich His Wife


http://www.commoncause.org/atf/cf/%7Bfb3c17e2-cdd1-4df6-92be-bd4429893665%7D/JUSTICE%20THOMAS%27%20FAILURE%20TO%20DISCLOSE%20INCOME%20OF%20SPOUSE.PDF


First.........Justice Thomas falsified 20 years of judicial financial disclosure forms by denying that his wife had income sources;
http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/Clarence_Thomas_2010_Disclosure.pdf

second, he engaged in judicial corruption by receiving $100,000 in support from Citizens United during his nomination and then ruling in favor of Citizens United in 2010 without disclosing that fact or disqualifying himself;

and third, he apparently conspired with his wife in a form of "judicial insider trading" by providing her with information about the result of the Court's decision in Citizens United prior to its issuance, which she then used to launch a new company to take financial advantage of that decision to benefit her and her husband.

On Friday, May 27, 2011 ,
Clarence Thomas' (corrected) 2010 Financial Disclosure Forms http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/Clarence_Thomas_2010_Disclosure.pdf were released showing that he had invested thousands of dollars in Liberty Consulting Inc. a lobbying and consulting firm founded by his wife to cater to the "tea party." The disclosure also revealed that his wife received "salary and benefits" from Liberty Consulting and Liberty Central.

MORE:
http://www.velvetrevolution.us/images/Clarence_Thomas_2010_Disclosure.pdf
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/wwwprotectourelectionsorg-calls-for-investigations-into-justice-thomas-in-light-of-new-financial-disclosures-122936083.html
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/03/981717/-Thomas-also-had-checked-a-box-marking-No-Spousal-Income?via=siderec
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/48086.html
http://www.change.org/petitions/impeach-supreme-court-justice-clarence-thomas

[Parker CA]

1. Kick and Rec to infinity and beyond! This is just ridiculous. Great info yet again, kpete!!

[northoftheborder]

81. Where are all you "great" news groups?? CNN, NBC, ABC,

CBC. Don't you have any pride in your craft, your supposed journalism, at least your "first" on the news break????????

:evilfrown: :evilfrown: :evilfrown: :grr: :grr: :grr:

[tblue37]

101. They are busy discussing "Weinergate." nt

[leveymg]

104. Filing a false report violates 5 USC App. 104. That's an impeachable criminal offense.

That appendix to the US Code is at: http://openjurist.org/title-5/us-code/appendix/104/failure-to-file-or-filing-false-reports.

Bottom-line: that was an impeachable offense by Thomas, one that potentially carries a year in prison and a $50,000 fine, as well as referral to the Judicial Conference and the ethics committee for "appropriate personnel or other action."

I read that to mean that Clarence Thomas is gone as Associate Justice. Yet, he's still ruling on cases. Why hasn't an Indictment been sought? WTF?

(a)
(1) The Attorney General may bring a civil action in any appropriate United States district court against any individual who knowingly and willfully falsifies or who knowingly and willfully fails to file or report any information that such individual is required to report pursuant to section 102. The court in which such action is brought may assess against such individual a civil penalty in any amount, not to exceed $50,000.
(2)
(A) It shall be unlawful for any person to knowingly and willfully
(i) falsify any information that such person is required to report under section 102; and
(ii) fail to file or report any information that such person is required to report under section 102.
(B) Any person who
(i) violates subparagraph (A)(i) shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both; and
(ii) violates subparagraph (A)(ii) shall be fined under title 18, United States Code.
(b) The head of each agency, each Secretary concerned, the Director of the Office of Government Ethics, each congressional ethics committee, or the Judicial Conference, as the case may be, shall refer to the Attorney General the name of any individual which such official or committee has reasonable cause to believe has willfully failed to file a report or has willfully falsified or willfully failed to file information required to be reported. Whenever the Judicial Conference refers a name to the Attorney General under this subsection, the Judicial Conference also shall notify the judicial council of the circuit in which the named individual serves of the referral.
(c) The President, the Vice President, the Secretary concerned, the head of each agency, the Office of Personnel Management, a congressional ethics committee, and the Judicial Conference, may take any appropriate personnel or other action in accordance with applicable law or regulation against any individual failing to file a report or falsifying or failing to report information required to be reported.

[BetsysGhost]

129. Why hasn't an Indictment been sought?

Mark, you know why.

kpete, thank you.

Kicked.

[leveymg]

131. More exhortation than question. Rhetorical device - I was tired, and couldn't

come up with anything more original. My bad. Mope.

But, no more mopey face, I promise!

[northoftheborder]

82. Where are you, Department of "Justice"???????

:evilfrown: :evilfrown: :evilfrown: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

[valerief]

87. It's the Dept of Just Us. They're the only ones who matter. nt

[russspeakeasy]

105. They are busy looking into weinergate.

[me b zola]

106. DOJ doesn't want to upset conservatives

It wouldn't be "good politics".

[aquart]

2. The constitution allows us to impeach Supreme Court judges.

It's really time.

[dixiegrrrrl]

7. How exactly does a Supreme get impeached?

Who has to call for it?
How is it done?

And best of all..

what can WE do to help????

[jberryhill]

9. Indictment by House, Trial by Senate

In other words - not going to make it past step one at present.

[dixiegrrrrl]

12. Sigh....true, dat.

[aquart]

15. So many reasons to change the House in 2012.

MEANWHILE, it is vital to make it clear NOW that Thomas deserves to be impeached and it is the corrupt Republican House that refuses to lose its Court majority by doing what is RIGHT rather than what is RIGHT WING.

[iamthebandfanman]

84. id like to live in the dream world you live in

where democrats controlling the house actually means someone would try to do something about this...


being the majority means jack when youre a democrat

[aquart]

111. Thank you for your concern.

We really shouldn't fight to regain control because it's all hopeless. Let the Republicans win even though 80% of the country is against them.

Isn't there a bridge unguarded somewhere?

[BR_Parkway]

119. it's sure a question to be asking all the candidates - both left and right

imagine every candidate between now and then for House/Sen/Pres being asked if they think a Supreme Court Justice should be investigated and impaeached over this - the media would have a tough time to ignore it

Does anyone have Sarah's twitter list? Someone could ask her
or email it written on an underwear picture from Weiner's account - then maybe the media would actually pay attention

[leveymg]

118. Just indict, try and convict him. It takes him off the streets for at least a year.

That, in itself, would be a major victory for the Constitution.

No way the guy returns to the Supreme Court from federal prison.

[icarusxat]

42. local entertainment, er...news won't touch this

maybe it is time to twitter on an international level if we want to protect ourselves from all enemies, foreign and domestic...

[dotymed]

95. I have signed Internet petitions

calling for his impeachment. So far, nothing.

It shows what a perverse society we have become, when a SCOTUS member can BLATANTLY break the law with NO consequences.

[mwb970]

32. And who is this "us" that will do the impeaching?

Congress? Obama? You and me?

:eyes:

[Thumper79]

117. Congress

That's why it's a lost cause, at least until 2012.

[geckosfeet]

35. Really. How much longer does this have to go on before someone starts the process.

[nadinbrzezinski]

46. as long as republicans and conservadems

have the real power in DC... ain't gonna happen

[applegrove]

3. I loved it on Boston Legal when they portrayed Thomas as totally quiet on the bench. He should

have been fired for being incompetent a long time ago.

[provis99]

4. hey, he's not quiet on the bench.

His snores can be heard while he's taking his usual naps in court.

[applegrove]

11. LOL!

[aquart]

16. Sure he isn't watching porn on his Blackberry?

[Hutzpa]

19. We should send him a picture using yfrog

:evilgrin:

[underpants]

37. all he does is wait to find out what Scalia thinks

*cha! ching* FREE money

[Vanje]

5. Kick, Rec, and IMPEACH! nt

[HipChick]

6. It worked, the media spent the last 48hrs looking to a smear, rather than looking into truth

[hifiguy]

8. Clearly, this is grounds for impeachment

by any standard. Complete and total disregard of the law and of judicial ethics. There's a good chance he might belong in jail.

[underpants]

38. Pres. Bartlett was impeached for much less on "The West Wing" but then Repubs don't live TV shows...

other than "24" which they openly said should be the precedent for national policy

[Citizen Worker]

10. Applying the "we need to look forward, not backward" formula does that mean that since Clarence

Thomas has an apparent ongoing, twenty years and counting, violation require the formula to be rewickered? Or, should we just "turn the page?" And if we turn the page doesn't the next page look like the previous page? What then? This presents a real dilemma to the Obama rationale for "justice."

[jberryhill]

13. How is it a dilemma for Obama?

Oh, I gotta hear this.

[SpiralHawk]

14. Impeach THE Clarence. He is such a foul RepubliCon Stooge.

THE Clarence has dragged the 'ethics' of the Supremes into the coke can of corruption.

[monmouth]

17. This needs to get to media we can depend on. Rachel? Lawrence?..n/t

[PufPuf23]

18. If the House does not impeach, the USA is no longer a Democracy for and of the People.

Thomas is more criminal than Edwards and had no business in the first place on the USSC.

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Impeach his sorry ass. nt

[Flying Dream Blues]

21. K&R nt

[myrna minx]

22. If CNN cared about news and not their fake "Weiner gate" story,

perhaps we could clean up the actual corruption in our entire system of government. But fake stories about pocket pool are more entertaining - as well as distracting.

[NYC_SKP]

23. Wiener Edwards!!! Edwards Weiner!!! (All I'm hearing today on the MSM)

I guess they just missed this little indiscretion... :sarcasm:

K/R

[spanone]

24. there's no room for this in the news industry. there is rampant sex by democrats.

[muriel_volestrangler]

25. A Supreme Court judge claims he can't understand what 'no spousal income' means?

That might almost be worse, if there were the remotest chance of it being true. Is he really saying he's that dumb? Can he be impeached for being incapable of doing his job?

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Enthusiast]

63. That DU member was wrong.

No one is correct all the time.

[Name removed]

97. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[annabanana]

27. Anthony W. is RIGHT ON THE MONEY calling for this clown to

recuse himself in ALL matters pertaining to health care. That his push was beginning to gain traction was the reason for the undies attack...

[lumpy]

33. By all that's holy Thomas should be investigated by the US

government and pay the full price if he is guilty of tax evasion or whatever. Unexcusable.

[Hubert Flottz]

28. K&R

He should be impeached ASAP.

[AzDar]

29. K & R

:kick:

[mwb970]

30. Why is this criminal allowed to keep his job?

Is it simply because he's a republican asshole? Is that all it takes now to be above the law? I don't even recognize this country any more. I want out.

[tblue37]

103. IOKIYAR, of course. nt

[emcguffie]

116. Does that mean something?

Could you translate for the rest of us?
Please?

[lazarus]

128. it means

It's OK If You're A Republican.

HTH.

:hi:

[tblue37]

130. "IOKIYAR" is an internet meme referring to the fact that no

matter what a Republican does, it is given a pass, whereas the same thing (or something much less serious) done by a Dem would be cause for a 24/7 hissy fit by the press and by Republican mouthpieces.

It means It's OK if you are a Republican.

[slay]

31. Impeach that lying asshole

he lied about Anita Hill too. our supreme court is really a supreme joke. ugh.

[tavalon]

34. Even on Wall Street, insider trading is illegal

I would say we have a real good impeachable offense and while the Senate isn't the best right now, I think even they could be convinced to convict.

[lsewpershad]

36. When

can this .... be sent to jail?

[Little Star]

39. Charges need to be brought against his ass! Disgusting & in your face..

corruption!

[Segami]

40. K&R

:kick: :kick: :kick:

[Ignis]

41. K&R

Oh, this should be good. :popcorn:

[Pab Sungenis]

43. When we regain the House in 2013

we need to bring Articles of Impeachment against this man.

[sofa king]

76. That appears to be the plan....

...But unfortunately, we have a gooney bird of a Senate election season to deal with in 2013. Only ten Republicans are up for reelection, while 23 seats are to be defended by Democrats or are open (that number may also have changed recently). It's true that the mechanism for overwhelming victory in 2012 is already in place and grinding away, but it appears that President Obama and Harry Reid are taking a super-long view with the intention of racking up a supermajority in the Senate in 2015.

If absolutely everything breaks our way in 2012, no Dem seats are lost, and every single Republican is defeated (a practical impossibility), then all of a sudden things look good for Thomas' early departure, because along with 61 Dems (or allies) in the Senate there would be a small circle of 5-7 Republican moderates with moral compasses who might or might not vote for impeachment.

In that case, Thomas might not wait around before he retires after a successful career of working for The Man and destroying the better nature of our country.

Bonus: Scalia will likely have to go, too. He's almost certainly being paid off in a similar way, only he's generally the one who does the thinking for the both of them, and he therefore likely set Thomas up to take the first hit.

[iamthebandfanman]

85. yeah, because all democrats would get behind it

oh wait, they wouldnt.

having the majority means jack when youre a democrat.

yay big tent.

[BuelahWitch]

44. And John Edwards is the one who might go to jail, eh?

:wtf:

[nadinbrzezinski]

45. There was a time when you could buy Senators and Justices

we are back. Things come full circle

[blm]

47. And WHERE is the media? Still up Drudge and Breitbart's asses.

.

[madrchsod]

51. oh, don`t worry the media will cover this...it just won`t be our media

[crazylikafox]

48. k&r

[louslobbs]

49. Thomas has absolutely no integrity. He has all the protection he needs to sit his fat ass on the

SCOTUS until he drops dead, or is caught in the act of molesting a child and even that might not be enough to impeach him with Republicons protecting him. Looks like we might have to wait until this Republicon fraud keels over to be rid of the Thomas scourge from the right leaning Supreme Court. If corruption had a face, it would mirror that of the Republicon party including, but not limited to, Thomas and his corrupt "bride" (as Thomas refers to her) Ginny.
Lou

[progressoid]

Ya, I saw an in depth story about this on CNN.

Oh no, wait, that was a dream.

[madrchsod]

50. so much for the integrity of this supreme court

[Rozlee]

112. It started loosing it's integrity once Thrugood Marshall died.

That Thomas was chosen to replace him was one of the greatest injustices in judicial history.

[DeSwiss]

52. IMPEACH!!! - K&R n/t

[burrowowl]

53. And when is he going to be Charged?

Soon, never ...?

[drokhole]

54. How is this not a gigantic fucking national scandal right now?!

Oh, that's right, Edwards/Weinergate. Also, Sarah Pain is riding a bus.

[glinda]

55. Why am I doubtful anything will happen.....

[lordsummerisle]

56. Every time I read something about Thomas

my blood pressure soars. I guess I'll stop reading until impeachment begins (meaning not in my lifetime).

[certainot]

57. if the left had 1000 unchallenged and ignored radio stations then this would be a story and

john edwards and anthony wiener would be no story at all.....

[Nothing Without Hope]

58. ...and he committed perjury during his appointment hearings

Anita Hill told the truth.

And he has done so much harm on the Supreme Court ever since.

[Firebrand Gary]

59. My thoughts...........AND K and R BIG TIME!

The GOP is so corrupt I doubt that there are enough Senate votes to impeach Thomas's ass. However I sure would love to see it take place on the Senate floor.

[madmax]

60. But, But

John Edwards penis and his love child take prcidence over this.

Yeah, the campaign money but... He's out and Ginny and Clarence are still in a position to scew us even more.

[Iwillnevergiveup]

61. Two questions

1. How culpuble is Ginny in this fraud?

2. If she is found to be as culpuble, could they occupy the same cell as a married couple?

K&R

[Enthusiast]

62. The guy need to go!

He has no place on the court.

[suffragette]

64. This is actual news that should be getting reported widely

Instead we get the trumped up bogus crap spewed out by the repeatedly discredited Breitbart and then followed up on by the major media.

K&R and thanks for finding and posting this.

[NM Independent]

65. This idiot needs to be impeached. NOW!

[drm604]

66. How culpable is his wife in all of this?

Can she be charged?

[WinkyDink]

72. 100% culpable, is how much. 100%.

[drm604]

91. So if it's dificult to go after a Supreme Court Justice,

what's stopping them from charging his wife? Maybe some kind of deal could be made involving his stepping down.

[drm604]

90. Dupe

Never mind.

[Name removed]

67. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[NewJeffCT]

68. Is anybody on DU naive enough to think Thomas will be impeached?

There was one Supreme Court judge impeached about 200 years ago. None since.

This has made no impact in the national media that I've heard or seen - sure, some progressive groups are calling for it, but how often do elected Democrats even listen to progressive groups?

Republics control the House, so this won't even be on the agenda.

[mackerel]

69. I hope you all realise that his wife is the brains behind all

this. Thomas doesn't even have a clue as to the wrong doing he's been involved in these past 20 years. She's a mentaller that one.

[NewJeffCT]

71. she's also the one that wrote to Anita Hill

recently, demanding she apologize. Not exactly a bright move.

[iamthebandfanman]

86. yes, whats more funny is that

they think having a democratic majority in the house would somehow make it happen ... lol

[NewJeffCT]

88. even when Dems got the majority in the House in 2006

impeachment was immediately taken off the table.

[elocs]

70. "Impeach!" Kind of sounds like the BushCo years here. DU reality check:

Republicans control the House. Hell, even under BushCo there was no impeachment when the Democrats controlled the House.

Here's a civic's lesson that DU conveniently forgets: it takes 67 votes in the Senate to convict (remember Bill Clinton?). Impeachment without conviction is like sex without orgasm--ultimately unsatisfying.

However, this is a great opportunity for us all to get righteously indignant even though we should know that nothing is going to legally come of it.

[NewJeffCT]

79. Impeachment was off the table, as I recall

and, I'm sure if republicans win the White House in 2012, 2016 or even not until 2020, a lot of the Bush criminals will be recycled into that administration.

[hwmnbn]

73. K&R

[Glimmer of Hope]

74. He is a liar and unfit to be a judge of any kind!

[JAnthony]

75. K +R What else is there to say, we knew this guy was a

jerk from day one.

He should NEVER have been nominated, let alone allowed on the SCOTUS.

[Faygo Kid]

77. Worthless corporate media. Tools. Weiner "story" and Palin bus tour.

That's it. You are guaranteed that they won't go near this story, the cowards. Thomas has powerful right-wingers behind him, with clout and wealth.

Even Jon Stewart is obsessed only with Rep. Weiner. After Thursday, I can say that his show is one I used to watch.

Anyway, nobody in the gutless media will pick this up and run with it.

[JAnthony]

78. Rule number one for corporate media these days: "pictures and video sell"

How do you do pictures of Thomas' conflict of interest?

Sarah and her bus, Weiner and his shorts... that's "media gold"

[lib2DaBone]

80. Meanwhile Clarence Thomas sucking cash from the Koch Bros...

and as a Supreme Court judge.. funneling tons of cash to the Wingnuts (Citizens United).

How is this not regulating from the bench? (The highest court bench in the land, BTW)


We are sooo screwed.

[blackspade]

83. We are unfortunately stuck with this asshole.

[horseshoecrab]

92. K&R n/t

[DeeDeeNY]

89. K & R

[CrispyQ]

93. Our nation abides by rule of laws.

One set of laws for the elite, another set for the People.

How anyone can look at the rot in our system & still beat their chests proudly, chanting "We're number one!" is beyond me.

[Moostache]

94. This SOOOOOOOOOOOOOO far beyond the "high crimes" of Clinton...

There is no justice in the nation and no laws any longer that carry moral weight.
People now obey the law, they do not respect it and they are given no reason to respect it.

Bush v Gore
Citizens United
Goldman Sachs and Wall Street thieves all free
Clarence Thomas remains on the bench

FUCK THAT!!!

No justice, no peace.....bet your ass it comes down to civil disobedience before this is over...

[JazzQuipster]

96. Impeach Thomas...

...there's no reason not to...and plent of reasons to do it.

[MrMickeysMom]

98. "ANYONE WHO KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY FALSIFIES ..."

"may be prosecuted" in civil/criminal court.

Perhaps he's off scott fee due to the fact that a dumb ass like Uncle Clarence could get his co-horts to over-rule something he "didn't know", and "didn't willfully falsify" ????


What a joke this makes out of the SCOTUS, indeed.

[bluedigger]

99. Well, there is no way to impeach him, practically speaking.

The SC is so politicized that nothing short of murder would move a Republican House to impeach under a Democratic administration. Certainly not tax evasion and conflict of interest - those are admirable traits in the eyes of the opposition. So, I guess it's up to Holder and the DOJ to bring criminal charges.

:rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl: :rofl:

[leveymg]

107. So, Indict him, already.

[Corruption Winz]

100. In all honestly... this is NEWS.

I mean, someone working within the government is doing what we would be jailed for if we did and this is still hard to track down to learn more of. I mean, I can't understand it.

Yes, I understand why and how it happens. What I can't understand is why we let it happen.

[leveymg]

102. Dupe.

[Patchuli]

108. More than half of the Supremes

are crooks. When is enough enough?????

[WillyT]

109. K & R !!!

:kick:

[raouldukelives]

110. K&R

[FailureToCommunicate]

113. Thomas should be forced to RECUSE his disgraceful self from ANY

further cases!



thanks kpete!

[City Lights]

114. Resign now, Clarence!

:thumbsdown: to LIARS!

[RC]

115. Didn't we know this a year or even two years ago?

This is old news to everyone except our Liberal main stream media. Do they know it even yet?

[Javaman]

120. And will Holder have the guts to pursue this?

I'm not holding my breath.

[Name removed]

121. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[caseymoz]

122. Really, who is surprised?

We have to beat the Repubs in the House in 2012 so we can impeach the guy. The evidence is there now.

[Warren Stupidity]

123. I bet a Brazillion Dollars: NOTHING CRICKETS OFF THE DAMN TABLE

Edwards is going to jail for like up to 30 years, Thomas will sit on the bench until he croaks, possibly from tertiary syphilis contracted from a romantic affair with Andrew Breitbart, or so I've heard.

[lonestarnot]

124. So richie rich on the bench thinks he can just lie to and steal from the American people. Hmmmf.

[Bluebear]

125. But the DOJ goes after John Edwards. Nice.

[alfredo]

126. Write letters to the editor, make the media pay attention.

[midnight armadillo]

127. An extra $100k per year is nothing

Heck, that barely pays for a Porsche convertible every year. It's an easy mistake to make.