"The Lynching" of Clarence Thomas---and Other "Uppity Blacks"

After destroying the integrity, reputation, and career of Robert Bork---nominee for the US Supreme Court--- the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Joe Biden, turned the wrath of the left on Clarence Thomas, the next nominee to the Supreme Court.

After dragging Thomas through the mud of allegations by co-worker Anita Hill, which were eventually dismissed as not credible, Committee Chairman Joe Biden asked nominee Clarence Thomas, "Do you have anything you'd like  to say?"

He did. And so do I.

Why are now "President" Biden and his people still trying to destroy Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas?

Be informed, not misled.

On October 11, 1991, Clarence Thomas responded:

He said, "Senator, I would like to start by saying unequivocally, uncategorically, that I deny each and every single allegation against me today that suggested in any way that I had conversations of a sexual nature or about pornographic material with Anita Hill, that I ever attempted to date her, that I ever had any personal sexual interest in her, or that I in any way ever harassed her."

"Secondly," he said, "and I think the more important point. I think that this today is a travesty. I think that it is disgusting. I think that this hearing should never occur in America. This is a case in which this sleaze, this dirt, was searched for by staffers of members of this committee, was then leaked to the media, and this committee and this body validated it and displayed it at prime time over our entire nation."

"How would any member on this committee, any person in this room, or any person in this country,  like sleaze said about him or her in this fashion? Or this dirt dredged up and this gossip and these lies displayed in this manner? How would any person like it?"

"The Supreme Court is not worth it. No job is worth it. I am not here for that. I am here for my name, my family, my life, and my integrity. I think something is dreadfully wrong with this country when any person, any person in this free country would be subjected to this."

Then he said this: 

"And from my standpoint as a black American, as far as I'm concerned, it is a high-tech lynching for uppity blacks who in any way deign to think for themselves, to do for themselves, to have different ideas, and it is a message that unless you kowtow to an old order, this is what will happen to you. You will be lynched, destroyed, caricatured by a committee of the U.S. -- U.S. Senate, rather than hung from a tree."

Why does the attempt at "lynching" continue 31 years later.

Thomas was eventually confirmed and seated on the United States Supreme Court. "President" Joe Biden would later apologize to Anita Hill for not completing the lynching.

Last week The New York Times said, "Democratic lawmakers reiterated calls on Thursday to tighten ethics rules for the Supreme Court after a report revealed that Justice Clarence Thomas had accepted luxury gifts from a major conservative donor without disclosing them."

An investigation by ProPublica described how Justice Thomas accompanied the donor, Harlan Crow, a real estate billionaire, on a series of vacations for nearly two decades. The trips included extended stays on Mr. Crow’s yacht, flights on Mr. Crow’s private jet, and visits to Mr. Crow’s all-male private retreat in Monte Rio, Calif.

ProPublica is a leftist nonprofit funded by the preeminent Democratic Party donor, financier George Soros, through his Foundation to Promote Open Society. Conservatives have criticized Soros for funding the election campaigns of various district attorneys who are soft on crime.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board says, "The left’s assault on the Supreme Court is continuing, and the latest front is the news that Justice Clarence Thomas has a rich friend who has hosted the Justice on his private plane, his yacht, and his vacation resort. That’s it. That’s the story. Yet this non-bombshell has triggered breathless claims that the Court must be investigated and that Justice Thomas must resign or be impeached. Those demands give way to the real political game here."

They quote a number of over-stated adjectives used by ProPublica in their attempt to lynch Thomas.

The Journal continues, "Adjective overkill is the method of bad polemicists who don’t have much to report. The ProPublica writers suggest that Justice Thomas may have violated ethics rules, and they quote a couple of cherry-picked ethicists who agree."

"This ethics talk," the Journal says, "is really about setting up an apparatus that politicians can then use against the Justices if there is any transgression, however minor or inadvertent. The claims of corruption are intended to smear the conservative Justices and tarnish the Court to tee up case recusals, impeachment, or a Court-packing scheme if Democrats get enough Senate votes to break the filibuster."

"It’s all ugly politics, but the left is furious it lost control of the Court, and it wants it back by whatever means possible."

The Left is systematically putting a wrecking ball on all our United States institutions.

Epoch Times says, "They Want to Destroy Him: Negative Coverage of Clarence Thomas Aims to Delegitimize Supreme Court."

Takeaway

It's ironic, at least to me, that no one had any problem with Ginsburg traveling around the Middle East and staying in nice places, meeting with undisclosed people who may have interests before the Court.

No one had a problem with Ginsburg’s trips or other Justices’ trips; please spare us the fake outrage about Justice Thomas.

So it’s all this gaslighting and double standards of the media and the Democrats applying them to Justice Thomas.

Clarence Thomas "Enrages" the left for the reasons he outlined back in 1991.

The left has been going after Thomas for nearly forty years.

Because he’s a black conservative, who dares to have his own thoughts and is never bent to their attacks. It enrages them.

Thomas is an “Originalist justice." His influence on the High Court has been significant.

With the nominees of President Trump to the Court and Thomas's influence within the Court, it has moved toward ruling on issues according to the original intent of the framers of our Constitution, returning the court to its proper place in the American constitutional system and steering the Supreme Court away from being a super-legislature that tried to implement progressive laws.

The Leftist progressives egregiously found a right to abortion in the Constitution, which does not exist 

Attacks on Thomas have persisted since he was nominated to the Supreme Court in 1991. 

He is the most brilliant mind currently serving on the Supreme Court at this time, in my opinion. 

What enrages us is that they tried to destroy Justice Thomas in 1991 and keep him off the Supreme Court. They failed spectacularly. And then they tried to smear and demean him in racist attacks once he got on the court.

And for 30 years, he has been steadfast in writing over 700 opinions, and the Supreme Court has come his way. He’s the intellectual leader of the Supreme Court. He’s winning, and that further enrages the left.

The Wall Street Journal editorial board concluded with this:

"This ethics talk is really about setting up an apparatus that politicians can then use against the Justices if there is any transgression, however minor or inadvertent. The claims of corruption are intended to smear the conservative Justices and tarnish the Court to tee up case recusals, impeachment, or a Court-packing scheme if Democrats get enough Senate votes to break the filibuster."

"It’s all ugly politics, but the left is furious it lost control of the Court, and it wants it back by whatever means possible."

Be Informed. Be Discerning. Be Vigilant. Be Engaged. Be Prayerful.