Clarence Thomas accuser calls for his impeachment - CBS News today

[Anthony60]

I'm curious what if a supreme court member becomes severely disabled say a stoke or obviously dementia, do they stay on the court even
in that condition because it's a lifelong appointment or is there a way to replace. As I remember reading somewhere Wilson had a stroke
was disabled & his wife had a lot to do with hiding that from the public & she became as powerful as anyone for a period of time.

This Ginsberg doesn't seem all that fit to me!

There's been a history of justices staying on beyond there useful time. It's time for Ruthie to hit a retirement home. She can spout off about politics from there.

 

[Praxas]

No, Bush did not nominate anyone after that statement by Schumer.

He nominated Alito and Alito was confirmed.

 

[Anthony60]

He nominated Alito and Alito was confirmed.

As far as I know, he was nominated in 2005, well before Schumer's statement.

 

[Anthony60]

Yet even at her advanced age....she is still smarter and has more brain function than most of the others.

She was a dummy 20 years ago, and is still a dummy today!

 

[ludin]

She was a dummy 20 years ago, and is still a dummy today!

ginsburg is one of the dumbest judges i have ever seen.
I think he age is affecting her rational judgement.

For someone that graduated at the top of her class in law school i would assume that she would know the constitution but her opinions directly
are the reverse of that as she invents things that do not exist or changes the wording in which she has 0 power to do.

 

[Praxas]

As far as I know, he was nominated in 2005, well before Schumer's statement.

On October 31, 2005, Samuel Alito was nominated by President George W. Bush for Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States to replace the retiring Sandra Day O'Connor. Alito had been a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit since 1990 when he was appointed by President George H. W. Bush, until he was approved by the Senate on January 31, 2006, and sworn in to be the 110th Justice of the Supreme Court.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Alito_Supreme_Court_nomination

3 months isn't bad at all. Like I said. At least Bush got his nominee confirmed, the Republican senate refused to see ANYONE from Obama.

 

[disneydude]

She was a dummy 20 years ago, and is still a dummy today!

And still smarter than 90% of those on the SC.

 

[disneydude]

There's been a history of justices staying on beyond there useful time. It's time for Ruthie to hit a retirement home. She can spout off about politics from there.

Thomas was before his useful time before he ever got appointed...and his performance on the bench has been abysmal.

 

[sangha]

Well I know well over 100 people said Obama was a Muslim. Sorry but I don't believe them.

There is a difference between 100 testifying about their beliefs, and 100 testifying about what they witnessed.

In addition, your 100 are from the opposite party from Obama. The witnesses against Thomas are from the same party

I doubt it would be compelling enough for impeachment. I'm just saying I wouldn't bet the farm on that at all.

Yes, it is extremely unlikely that he will ever be impeached, mainly because the dems have no balls.

 

[tres borrachos]

THE THOMAS NOMINATION; CONFLICT EMERGES OVER A 2D WITNESS
By ADAM CLYMER,
Published: October 11, 1991

Senator Alan K. Simpson, a Wyoming Republican on the panel who is a Thomas supporter, said he had seen Ms. Wright's deposition and did not regard it as significant.​

Thanks Rob. That answers my question about did she accuse him back then - yes she did.

But the article sure made it sound like she was given her voice. She testified before Senate committee and Senate investigators and they dismissed her claim as not significant (whatever that means, I don't know, but let's go with it). Maybe the Republicans dismissed her out of partisanship or because they really felt it wasn't "significant". I wish I knew.

And this is completely contradictory:

Phyllis Berry, who worked with Judge Thomas at both the Department of Education and the commission, said Ms. Wright was dismissed in 1985. Ms. Berry said that two incidents caused Ms. Wright's dismissal, poor handling of a press conference and a physical fight with a commission official. 'An Excellent Employee'

But The Charlotte Observer said that when an editor called Judge Thomas for a reference in 1990, he said she had resigned. The Observer's special projects editor, Mary Newsom, was quoted in the paper as saying she was "an excellent employee" and one who worked "very well under stress."

Very curious, all of it.

Thomas won't be impeached no matter who controls Congress, IMO.

 

[Anthony60]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Alito_Supreme_Court_nomination

3 months isn't bad at all. Like I said. At least Bush got his nominee confirmed, the Republican senate refused to see ANYONE from Obama.

Bush left office in 2008, Alito was confirmed in 2005, that's over 2 years. After Alito, Schumer said he would not allow anymore SC justices for Bush, a year and a half before the end of Bush's term. McConnell waited 9 months for a new President, and had no guarantee it would be a Republican.

Not even close to Schumer's year and a half proclamation. Bush had 40% of his term left when Schumer said he would refuse to allow another judge.

 

[Deuce]

Bush left office in 2008, Alito was confirmed in 2005, that's over 2 years. After Alito, Schumer said he would not allow anymore SC justices for Bush, a year and a half before the end of Bush's term. McConnell waited 9 months for a new President, and had no guarantee it would be a Republican.

Not even close to Schumer's year and a half proclamation. Bush had 40% of his term left when Schumer said he would refuse to allow another judge.

Which nominee got held up for that long?

 

[EMNofSeattle]

Because he lied about it, under oath.

If you believe the accusers, which you only believe because Thomas is a Republican

 

[EMNofSeattle]

I do think though Thomas (and Kennedy) should both retire so Trump can replace them with 40 y/o conservative judges

 

[JMR]

My gut feeling is that she might be credible.

But I can't see much happening three decades later, given his position as an appointed SC Justice.

And there's no way the GOP will move against him. They won't even go up against Trump, with his plethora of problems.

I have little doubt that she is credible. I'm old enough to remember the Thomas hearings, and how certain witnesses were not called, as the committee had heard enough!.

I'm sure the GOP won't move against him, but at least for a day or two he can't continue to act like he is "a victim of a high tech lynching." He's just another pig.

 

[JMR]

Bush left office in 2008, Alito was confirmed in 2005, that's over 2 years. After Alito, Schumer said he would not allow anymore SC justices for Bush, a year and a half before the end of Bush's term. McConnell waited 9 months for a new President, and had no guarantee it would be a Republican.

Not even close to Schumer's year and a half proclamation. Bush had 40% of his term left when Schumer said he would refuse to allow another judge.

I think you are confused about this. Senator Schumer became the Minority Leader in 2017. I don't think he was making any such statements in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008.

Also, I'm curious as to which nomination was stalled? I do not recall.

 

[Middleground]

Why would he be impeached over a 30 year old allegation?

Yet y'all are always pushing the Pocahontas Warren narrative that's over 40 years old. And she didn't hurt ANYONE.

 

[DiAnna]

My gut feeling is that she might be credible.

But I can't see much happening three decades later, given his position as an appointed SC Justice.

And there's no way the GOP will move against him. They won't even go up against Trump, with his plethora of problems.

Anita Hill testified knowing that her life would never be the same. She did it because she couldn't in good conscious support a man of such dubious character to be confirmed to the SCOTUS. That took courage. She was mocked, ridiculed, called names... and that was just from the senators in the room! I wish this woman had also come forward, but I'm not sure even I would have the strength of character to go through the public and private abuse Hill has taken for doing so.

Nothing will happen to him now unless a barrage of #metoo allegations spanning the decades shorts out the internet.

 

[DiAnna]

Here is a more detailed version
The Case for Impeaching Clarence Thomas

Holy ****. Here I thought I followed those hearings closely... I never knew any of this at the time. Four other women wanted to testify, and the democratically-controlled committee refused to call them?

OMG. I'm completely gobsmacked. If Biden winds up being the democratic nominee in 2020, he'd damn well better explain himself about this matter or he won't get my vote. I'm so... disappointed to read this.

 

[Chomsky]

Anita Hill testified knowing that her life would never be the same. She did it because she couldn't in good conscious support a man of such dubious character to be confirmed to the SCOTUS. That took courage. She was mocked, ridiculed, called names... and that was just from the senators in the room! I wish this woman had also come forward, but I'm not sure even I would have the strength of character to go through the public and private abuse Hill has taken for doing so.

Nothing will happen to him now unless a barrage of #metoo allegations spanning the decades shorts out the internet.

She and others did come forward. They were not allowed to testify.

 

[Derp]

I think you are confused about this. Senator Schumer became the Minority Leader in 2017. I don't think he was making any such statements in 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008.

Also, I'm curious as to which nomination was stalled? I do not recall.

https://www.politico.com/story/2007/07/schumer-to-fight-new-bush-high-court-picks-005146

New York Sen. Charles E. Schumer, a powerful member of the Democratic leadership, said Friday the Senate should not confirm another U.S. Supreme Court nominee under President Bush “except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“We should reverse the presumption of confirmation,” Schumer told the American Constitution Society convention in Washington. “The Supreme Court is dangerously out of balance. We cannot afford to see Justice Stevens replaced by another Roberts, or Justice Ginsburg by another Alito.”

As Anthony already stated, it was moot because no other confirmations came up after that.

 

[radcen]

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/clarence-thomas-accuser-calls-for-his-impeachment/

A woman who has accused Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment has written an article recounting her allegations in which she expresses "hope" that he is removed from the bench.

Angela Wright-Shannon, who worked under Thomas when he was Chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in the 1980s, says Thomas repeatedly harassed her at the time. She was an "uncalled witness" during Thomas' contentious Senate confirmation hearing when he was nominated for the Supreme Court in 1991, in which attorney Anita Hill accused Thomas of harassment and inappropriate behavior.
=========================================================================
I knew that Anita Hill could not have made up her story about this guy.

In this case I feel no sympathy for her. She was an uncalled witness, which means she wasn't too shy or ashamed to say something at the time. Anita Hill made "piling on" acceptable since it was already high profile. Sorry, but this is a case of she should have said something then and not waited.

 

[sangha]

Holy ****. Here I thought I followed those hearings closely... I never knew any of this at the time. Four other women wanted to testify, and the democratically-controlled committee refused to call them?

OMG. I'm completely gobsmacked. If Biden winds up being the democratic nominee in 2020, he'd damn well better explain himself about this matter or he won't get my vote. I'm so... disappointed to read this.

Biden has apologized to Hill, but I still cannot get past what he did

 

[DiAnna]

She and others did come forward. They were not allowed to testify.

So I now know, thanks to that very thorough article sangha provided. Apparently the process and confirmation had already been sealed by both parties on a handshake before the hearings even began. So very disappointed to learn all this.

 

[DiAnna]

Biden has apologized to Hill, but I still cannot get past what he did

I can't either. If he wants my vote, he will publicly confess his part in deliberately allowing Anita Hill to be railroaded and destroyed.