Saturday, October 23, 2010

A Perjurer on the US Supreme Court

By Robert Parry
October 23, 2010

In late 1998, when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to impeach President Bill Clinton for lying under oath about a sexual affair, many on the Right insisted that the issue wasn’t the sex but the perjury. They are now confronted with a parallel case in which U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas quite clearly perjured himself to get his seat on the bench.

Read on.


rosemerry said...

Very worrying that political and personal viciousness allows such a creep to be on the Supreme court; Can he be removed, and forced to apologise to Anita hill and others?

Bill said...

And that makes him what?

One more lying POS like the other eight.

Mark E. Smith said...

The problem isn't the idiots on the Supreme Court, the problem is that Americans are still accepting a Constitution that vested supreme power in the hands of an unelected supreme court rather than in the hands of the people. The dictionary definition of a democratic form of government is one in which supreme power is vested in the hands of the people.

We've never had a democratic form of government and half of the American electorate, those who still vote in our faith-based, unverifiable, corporate funded, sham elections, where the will of the people can be overruled by the Supreme Court at any time as it was in 2000, are so ignorant and apathetic that they don't care.

Mark E. Smith said...

@rosemerry: No, rosemerry, Thomas cannot be removed from the Supreme Court. Our Constitution says that only Congress can remove Supreme Court justices for bad behavior, and the right wing Democratic and Republican political parties that control Congress on behalf of their big corporate donors, count on Thomas as a reliable right wing vote on the Supreme Court.

James Young said...

"In late 1998, when the Republican-controlled House of Representatives voted to impeach President Bill Clinton for lying under oath about a sexual affair, many on the Right insisted that the issue wasn’t the sex but the perjury."

And in 1998, you on the far Left "insisted that the issue wasn't the [perjury,] but the [sex]."

And what were YOU saying at the time? Doubtless reflexively defending the Great Prevaricator.

Anonymous said...

These people are just plain evil, and of course they claim to be Christians, as if Jesus would ever approve of this. It is sickening to see Republicans attack all that is good and true in this world, and if they regain control of our government, they will finish the job that Bush began. It is said that a sign of the end-times is "when evil struts about in broad daylight", and it is happening right in front of our eyes.

Mark E. Smith said...

An anonymous (for good reason) Democrtic Party political hack and troll writes, "...It is sickening to see Republicans attack all that is good and true in this world, and if they regain control of our government, they will finish the job that Bush began."

They don't need Republicans in control for that. Democrats now control the White House and Congress and they've expanded the Bush war crimes (wars of aggression based on lies--crimes against humanity), increased Bush handouts and balouts for the rich, continued the Republican agenda they supported and voted for when Bush was in office, and are protecting the Bush administration from investigation and prosecution to help them get back in office again.

What kind of sorry sack of sh*t thinks that we still have two parties in this country? We have the Democratic wing of the party of the corporations, and the Republican wing of the party of the corporations, both funded by the corporations, both representing the corporations, and neither of them (except for a couple of shills who always pretend to represent their constituents during election campaigns, but never break with the corporation parties they're shilling for) representing the interests of the American people.

Clairese Starr said...

This is YELLOW journalism, Parry, and not your usual fare.

Even if this woman's accusations are true, with regard to his advances, all that makes him is a heterosexual man, tempted by an alluring colleague; something you closeted homos never have understood.

It is long past time for the entire body of "workplace law" and all of its little harassment scandals to be tossed right off of this little blue planet.

American women need to grow-up, and American men need to be allowed to be the aggressive achievers that they once were.

There is no doubt that if these lesbo-feminazis could not sue the highly capable men here in America for aggressive adult man-behavior anymore, then our economy would quickly be on the rebound.

End the legal war on Men, especially White Men, and watch our economy soar!

Anonymous said...

People, beware. This is another LEFT vs RIGHT comment by Mr. Parry. Parry, if you want to bring up Congressional deceit, let's talk Barnie Frank and his lover who took down Fannie & Freddie by Lying to President Bush about the status of F&F's financial condition when the Pres inquired, since Barnie was in charge of these factions. AND, let's not forget the lies Barnie proclaimed to Congress about his financial holdings which were and are still ILLEGAL and he owes taxes on. Why is BArnie still in Congress BTW? Do you think it's because he is a DEMO in a DEMO controlled Congress?

Ethan Allen said...

Look at the bright side Bob, one decent and cogent comment out of nine, in response to an excellent article, is not a total loss.
And yes "rosemerry", Thomas is a creep!

boxer said...

HE MUST BE IMPEACHED...It's another soft ball the Democrats should knock out of the park. But they won't even swing at it.

Heil Mary said...

Fascist wallflower Ginni and looksist playboy Uncle Tom deserve each other. I would have joined Anita Hill but I was slaving at 3 hard to find and keep low wage jobs to pay for desperately needed plastic surgery to correct Catholic anti-abortion Munchausen by Proxy medical parental abuse that ruined my face. The abstinence only-imposing scars not only ruined my chances for marriage and a career, but also made simple errands nightmarish because of constant public scorn. When I found out a no experience male colleague was being paid $5,000 more per year, I was urged by EEOC employees to file a complaint. Unfortunately, my case was immediately reviewed in person by Uncle Tom who was offended by my flat chest and scarred face. He screamingly threw me out of his office and derided my appearance to a baffled male colleague in the hallway as I trudged out. The incident made me add poisonous leaking silicone implants to my extreme makeover. Now I'm crippled by total body inflammation and crushing fatigue. I hope ninny Ginni and Uncle Tom make each other miserable.

Heil Mary said...

P.S. "Clareise Starr" is really a sexually harassing MALE.

Iron Chef Kosher! said...

The only thing sicker than the original fiasco is the way it's being defended today - and, even worse than that, by stupid women as well as men.

michaelslevinson said...

You mention Judge Sentelle. I had a case that went before him against the FCC, back in 1994, and, in abuse of his discretion, he wouldn't even grant me a hearing. I then appealed to the Supreme Court.

Suddenly, on the Friday A.M. before the balloting opened in New Hampshire for the presidential primary, Rhenquist had the cart-pushing court clerks (not lawyers) run around to all the Justice's chambers and bring the papers for their Friday conference. At two minutes to 11:00, right before the conference was over, Rhenquist tells them, by the way, there is this Levinson case v. FCC I have read the papers - it's frivolous - nothing here - we won't hear it.

The chump developed his own First Amendment issue - esophagus throat cancer!

Well, in 2001 Miscellaneous Appropriations Act, buried in Volume 114, PART 5, the FCC inserted an amendment to the access law, removing all the PBS stations from the Public Interest.


I'm taking FCC, ABC, NBC, PBS, CBS, and Fox to Federal District Court, because i was and is - still am a candidate for president, and however they rule I will have the "right of review" directly with the Supremes as long as i file within 20 s days.

I'm so glad i ran into consortium.

PS I thought my email screen name would be at the top, which is jacklegsjumpingup.lev at gmail.commie. Run the words "jacklegs jumping up" in your New York Slimes archive. See what you get. Peace :)