If you think Nazi memo collectors secretly funding Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas are bad, shut up. Clarence Thomas may have broken the law in the process by hiding a real estate deal with the same Republican billionaire.
A similar Nazi collector, Harlan Crowe, He purchased the property from Clarence Thomas in 2014. Clarence Thomas did not disclose this real estate deal, meaning he hid it. (Not revealing things has become a theme for Thomas.)
“One of Texas billionaire Harlan Crowe’s companies quietly bought several lots on a residential street in Savannah, GA. The seller? Crow’s friend and traveling companion, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas,” ProPublica It is concluded.
“The transaction is the first known example of money flowing from a Republican megadonor to a Supreme Court justice. Crow’s company bought the property for $133,363 from three co-owners — Thomas, his mother and the family of Thomas’ late brother, according to state tax documents and an Oct. 15, 2014, filing in Chatham County court. Document,” Propublica He reported.
Judges must disclose details of real estate sales over $1,000.
Here are the blank lots purchased from Thomas for his contract with Crow + Thomas’s signature. pic.twitter.com/fXkBa34Vxe
— Justin Elliott (@JustinElliott) April 13, 2023
“Thomas never disclosed that he sold Savannah’s properties. This appears to be a violation of the law, four ethics law experts told ProPublica.
This also means that Harlan Crowe, a billionaire collector of Nazi memorabilia, owns the house where Clarence Thomas’ mother lives, as ProPublica points out.
“Justice Thomas did not respond to our detailed inquiries. Crowe sent us this statement about his plans to create a museum to tell the story of Thomas in one of the homes he bought,” ProPublica reporter Justin Elliott shared on Twitter.
Harlan the Nazi collector crow He issued a statement. He bought the house in Savannah, Georgia as part of a landmark project, trying to defuse criticism from the visionary.
However, he said, “This crow’s statement is stupid. “The price paid for Thomas and the market will be significant, but still need to be defined,” said Andrew Weissman, who spent 20 years at the DOJ. He wrote.
“Given the role Crow played in supporting the lifestyle of Thomas and his wife, you have to think this was an effort to put money in their pockets,” Virginia Canter, a former government ethics attorney at CREW, told ProPublica.
Whatever they did with this transaction, even if it was all above board, had to be revealed. The fact that it’s not so easy highlights the need for further investigation (real estate deals are a widespread money laundering scheme).
The news comes after the bombshell that Crowe has been secretly supporting Thomas for years. If Thomas builds any kind of moral bank on this point, this still seems like a violation of the law.
The problem with Thomas is that he has the opposite moral bank with the US electorate. His wife, Ginny Thomas, tried to overthrow the government. He was unable to defend himself from the cases that she and her activist groups pushed before the courts. He ruled on the Affordable Care Act, while his wife, Ginny, was paid to litigate. In violation of the health care law, he forgot to disclose his wife’s income. He failed to recuse himself from the case of Senator Lindsey Graham, who is the Lawrence tribe pointed outfederal law compels him to do so.
When Tribe wrote this in 2022, he continued with a warning that seems particularly dire now: “In government, Alexander Hamilton’s ‘less dangerous’ branch—the judiciary—is dangerous without any enforcement mechanism behind the law.”
Yet Thomas’s argument to himself and his wife is exactly this – they are above the law, they do not enforce the law as far as the cause they support is concerned, and Thomas does not obey the law, when he chooses, for whatever reason he cares or benefits.
When all the decent lawyers agree that the practice is beyond disturbing and to the point of undermining the rule of law, it is past time for our institutions to come into action.
And decent lawyers agree. Here he is an emeritus scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and editor of The Atlantic Norm Ornstein In this case, Thomas is “unfit for the bench.”
“Simply destructive. Clarify violations of the law by Clarence Thomas. Repeated efforts to cover it up. He is not eligible for the bench.”
This must be the point for his continued corruption. Clarence Thomas is unfit for the bench and the court loses legitimacy the longer he stays on it.
Listen to Sarah on the PoliticusUSA Pod, the daily newspaper podcast over here.
Sarah has interviewed President Barack Obama, then-VP Joe Biden, 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi on multiple occasions, and she exclusively covered current President Donald Trump’s first in-house visit since his first impeachment.
Sarah is a two-time Telly Award-winning video producer and a member of the Guild of Professional Journalists.
Connect with Sarah is on PasteMastodon @[email protected], and Twitter
Leave a Reply