Soulshiner wrote: Looks like it's not just his wife...
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/0 ... homas-aei/
Thanks for the link! It gives some specific examples which I didn't see in the other links.
As I said before, I don't think federal judges should be accepting any large gifts, at least not from anyone other than immediate family. And if the gift giver later has a case before your court, you must recuse yourself. Clarence Thomas failed in both areas, although there does not seem to be any law against it (there should be). If there is some proceedure for an ethics investigation, it should happen now. Err, it actually should of happened long ago because the gift they speak of was given 10 years ago.
And this brings me to another point. This is an observation on my part. All of a sudden in the last few days, liberal sites are suddenly writing all kinds of articles about Thomas' ethics.
That gift was given in 2001. They cite three cases in the court. One was in 2008, another in 2006, and a third in July 2000, before the gift was given (although Thomas wrote his decision in Feb 2001, but in all three cases Thomas voted with the majority). This is old stuff and now it's a big deal? And his wife has been with the Heritage Foundation for at least 10 years so far as I can tell, but now it's an ethics issue?
So why all the articles lately? Humm. Isn't the constitutionality of Obama's health care bill expected to go before the Supreme Court in the not too distant future? Looks to me like there is a concerted organized attack machine going on now to whip up the liberal troops against Thomas (including the recent petition to impeach him which was earlier posted here). Why else is this happening now? Looks like they want to get him off the court before the case goes to the Supreme Court, or at least get him to recuse himself.
So far as Obamacare goes, there is also the question of whether or not Justice Kagan should recuse herself. She was Solicator General under Obama when the bill was put together and apparently had some involvement which I think was brought up during her confirmation. I do see some recent articles about her at conservative sites, but nothing close to what we see now about Thomas.
Anyway, as I've said, I think Thomas does have ethics issues. But I don't recall hearing nearly as much about them in the past when they happened, compared to what's going on now.
