New Details:Clarence Thomas Appears to Have 'Knowingly, Willfully' Violated Rule of Law for 20 Years

[BradBlog]

Clarence Thomas Appears to Have 'Knowingly and Willfully' Violated Rule of Law for Twenty Years
Could face fines, jail time, though corporate media downplay criminality, even as evidence suggests special treatment for the U.S. Supreme Court Justice...

The words "EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER LAW" are famously chiseled above the main portico of the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. But is one of the Justices seated in that building, with a lifetime appointment, now receiving special treatment under the law instead?

Evidence is mounting that U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas violated federal law by failing to report his wife's annual salary of more than $120,000 per year from conservative political organizations by checking "NONE" on the box for "Non-Investment Income" for his wife Virginia on judicial Financial Disclosure Reports for the last 20 years.

When reached by phone for comment on Friday, two different officials at the Judicial Conference were particularly hostile in response to questions from The BRAD BLOG in regard to what appeared to be special treatment afforded the Supreme Court Justice, allowing him to deliver "self-initiated amendment" letters for twenty years of inaccurate financial disclosure forms on a Saturday when the federal government office is not usually open to the public. The swift processing of Thomas' documents, carried out as the news of his false filings was about to break in the media, allowed subsequent news reports to downplay the issue as having already been handled, old news.

Moreover, Thomas' 'inadvertent omissions', as he describes them now, appear to be in violation of U.S. federal law, in contradiction to suggestions from the Los Angeles Times' original reporting on this matter last weekend. That report, breaking the story publicly, quoted a judicial ethics expert from Northwestern University School of Law as asserting that Thomas' failure to report his wife's income was "not a crime of any sort."

It would appear that the law professor was wrong.

Closer examination of the original disclosure forms that Thomas filed and signed year after year, quite directly suggest crimes were committed, though none of the mainstream corporate media reports on this issue, to our knowledge, have bothered to focus on that point. According to the statute clearly printed on the disclosure reports filed by Thomas, just below his signature on each, the Supreme Court Justice could be held accountable for his omissions by penalties under the U.S. Code including as much as a $50,000 fine and up to one year imprisonment, or both, for each violation of the federal law. Even stricter penalties are also a possibility --- at least if one believes that even U.S. Supreme Court Justices are subject to the Rule of Law...

FULL STORY: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=8331

[WhiteTara]

1. kicking for Rachel.

:kick:

[NoKoolAideForMeThx]

135. agree

Please Rachel. Shine a light for us. I'm sick of the ReThuglicans being above the law.

[DavidDvorkin]

2. I wish I could believe he'll be punished for this

Signed,

Tired Old Cynic

[Raine]

14. Oh yeah, he'll get away with it.

If he had been appointed by a Democratic president he would be impeached but beings it was repuke that put him in....

[idrahaje]

59. course he'd get away with it, he put Bush into Office for 4 years

Go figure. Can we get those 4 years back??

[NewJeffCT]

106. If Scalia was a liberal

Republics would already be scheduling impeachment hearings...

[Can of Whoop-ass]

131. Correction

hanging and FOX would dictate what kind of rope or electric cord.

[Starckers]

130. Uh

Doesn't anybody know of Tim Geitner?  Those in power stay
there.

[Joe Bacon]

88. Republicans are above the law.

They are never punished for the crimes they commit. When they get caught with a dead intern in their office, it's all covered up and they wind up on a morning TV show.

[Zambero]

93. Order up: One high-tech coverup

Then back to more business as usual for this icon to corruption and ineptitude.

[drmeow]

126. Me, too.

Sigh.

[Iliyah]

134. He won't

and the corporate media is staying away from this news. Now if it were a progressive Supreme Court judge, all hell would be breaking out.

[RandomThoughts]

3. That is the meaning of the Matrix clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rnWSLqV3R0


People think that is showing them what life can be, it is actually showing what many are doing at the expense of most people, they want anarchy for them, and by 'back room agreements' wont prosecute each other, and don't want people to know some of the things they think they are entitled to.

It is cabal of criminality by claim of superiority. Some of them think they are actually aliens, some are not even really people anymore, they been driven by things for so long. And some have various other delusions.


Me personally, I am due beer and travel money, and many experiences.

[BrklynLiberal]

5. +100

[japple]

17. Just look at Clarence Thomas' eyes. They are dead and

have been ever since he sold his soul.

[LiberalFighter]

23. He doesn't have a soul.

And if he was paid for something requiring relinquishing his soul then he would also be guilty of fraud.

[DeSwiss]

40. +1000

:thumbsup:

[Swagman]

58. there should be socialised beer money for all !

if a Supreme Court judge can break the rules then the law IS an ass.

[BrklynLiberal]

4. duh. if only he had known about that law........................

What an abysmally horrendous person to have been allowed onto the Supreme Court.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Skratchez]

39. Tax laws are overly complicated.

Clearly he understands Constitutional law, he just can't get the whole tax code. Especially the part about paying taxes on income.

Flat tax NOW to protect poor simpletons like Thomas.

[WCGreen]

67. It's not a tax issue...

It's reporting the income of his spouse in order to determine if there are any potential conflicts of interest between financial holdings or gains and cases the justice will rule upon.

It's a violation of Ethics which, in the realm of our judicial system, are extremely important.

Lawyers are disbarred and often thrown in jail for violating the rules they agreed to abide by when they are sworn in as officers of the court.

[AzDar]

6. K&R

:kick:

[Adsos Letter]

7. IMPEACH!

One can always hope...

[BradBlog]

31. Good luck with that...criminal charges on the other hand...

Impeachment, is a political process by its definition, and requires action by the GOP-majority House.

Criminal charges, however, can simply be brought by a federal prosecutor -- if there are any still out there who give a damn about the rule of law (when powerful, non-Democrats are involved.)

[bluevoter4life]

124. What's Patrick Fitzgerald up to these days? n/t

[Old and In the Way]

8. Consider, for a moment, how the media and the RW Wurlitzer would react

if this was Thurgood Marshall that had violated the law so blatantly. He'd have been hounded out of office by now. But because Clarance is a reliable vote for Scalia and whatever activist agenda and/or settled law they wish to overturn....he's untouchable. I'm sick of the double standard that exists for progressives vs. conservatives.

[ThomCat]

28. Yes, absolutely. It is a blatant double standard protecting

right wing republicans. x(

It is sickening, but true.

[Octafish]

10. Outstanding report.

The figures involved are substantial.
The numbers would be hard to forget.
I wonder what other numbers are in his life?
May they be 20-to-30 years at hard labor.

From OP:

Common Cause President Bob Edgar characterized Thomas' claims that there was a "misunderstanding of the filing instructions", as stated on his "self-initiated amendments", as "difficult to believe" and "implausible."

"Justice Thomas sits on the highest court of the land, is called upon daily to understand and interpret the most complicated legal issues of our day and makes decisions that affect millions," he said in a Commom Cause statement issued last week. "It is hard to see how he could have misunderstood the simple directions of a federal disclosure form. We find his excuse is implausible."

Thomas' claims become even more "implausible" when considering, as AP reported, that he did succeed in including his wife's employment on many of those very same disclosure reports filed prior to 1996.

"Plausible" may be relative, but it's always just enough for these crooked bastard traitors.

[beac]

33. And if he really DIDN'T understand them, that in itself should be grounds for impeachment!

Ignorance of the law is no excuse, but ignorance of the law in a member of SCOTUS is downright appalling. More proof of his unfitness? That he wasn't embarrassed to try and claim that he didn't understand the law. :banghead:

[Octafish]

119. Ignoramus et ignorabimus.

In addition to being a puerile know-nothing greedhead, Thomas is a hypocrite who is documented to have climbed the ladder of equal opportunity and then pulled it away from those following in his footsteps.

Hope they sentence him to hard labor, hold the cold Coke.

[Merlot]

37. "ignorance of the law is no excuse"

Even if it were an honest mistake, he is still responsible for it.

[Octafish]

120. True. And wouldn't a swell CPA volunteer his services to help him make sure all was legal?

CPAs to the rich are worth every penny.

Every year, my wife's accountant tracks me down to the my last farthing. I empty my pitiful 1020-forms or whatnot on his desk. And then he asks her, "Were there any other sources of income for you and your spouse in 2009?"

We say, "No." at the same time. But then, we're not getting six figures out of The Heritage Foundation or the Koch brothers.

[Rex]

95. The M$M let the Bush boys get away with stealing a billion from the S&L days.

I expect NO PUNISHMENT for Tomas...it would be verifying that WE WERE RIGHT THIS WHOLE TIME. And you know how liberals can never be vindicated, the M$M hates the very mention of our 'brand'. Clarence Thomas is a known criminal...wish someone would step up and impeach his ass!!! Take Scarface too! Sadly, no one is going to jail - the rich elite that run this country include Thomas. Sadly.



Just one more piece of the jigsaw puzzle falls into place - 2000 changed everything, for the worst.

[Octafish]

121. A guilty verdict would be the decisive turning point in the war on the BFEE.

Thomas, Scalia, un-Kennedy, O'Connor and the late vote-suppressor Sgt. Pepper Rehnquist gave them free reign, 5-4.



Rehnquist, like Hitler, was a corporal during a world war.

They learned from the best.
They stole in the S&L days.
They stole in the great Wall Street bailout.
And they moved it to Switzerland, all quasi-semi-legal-like.
And they put it to evil use.

[DCKit]

11. What about his conjoined twin, Fat Tony?

Frick and Frack, Humpty to his Dumpty.

[gratuitous]

12. Why would "Justice" Thomas have to follow the law?

Besides, that's just lookin' backward to the past instead of forward to the future. And we all know how partisan and unsensible that is! It makes the baby Jesus cry, too.

[PoliticAverse]

13. So, since he's a member of the government his penalty will be censure then ? n/t

[upi402]

15. The law used against us, and for "them"

The rule of law has been corrupted. Media talks about activist judges being liberals, not the truth - that they're corporatist.

[fishwax]

16. kick

:kick:

[L. Coyote]

18. Good thing he knew he was a privileged Republican, above the law and all that

kind of like Hosni Mubarak :rofl:

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RaleighNCDUer]

20. Aw, c'mon, give him a break. It's not his fault

that he cannot understand all that legalese gobbledigook.

Don't make fun of the intellectually handicapped.

[hootinholler]

21. But it was investment income...

Being the conservative, he invested his wife into the think tanks and it yielded $120K per annum.

No? :shrug:

Oh he didn't report it as income from investments either?

-Hoot

[FiveGoodMen]

22. I wonder if his wife wants Anita Hill to apologize for this, too.

[LiberalFighter]

24. Now is the time to hound the guy and his wife.

[spanone]

25. maybe clarence is taking so much under the table, he didn't notice an extra 120 grand?

[Enthusiast]

79. That is a distinct possibility. nt

[Bluebear]

26. but ANITA HILL was lying!!!!!!1111

[donheld]

27. I'm sure in Thomas' mind laws don't apply to him.

He's exempt

[tanyev]

29. Hey, Ginni, I would love you to consider an apology sometime

and some full explanation of why you did what you did with your husband. 'Kay?

[Kingofalldems]

30. Special Prosecutor needed--subpoena all records

[neverforget]

32. RULE OF LAW! Impeach him!

I can dream can't I?

[PSzymeczek]

34. Impeach him!

NOW!

[PSzymeczek]

36. And

Appoint Anita Hill in his place.

[glinda]

35. Crying out loud for impeachment!

[madrchsod]

38. corrupt to the core

[DeSwiss]

41. IMPEACH!!! K&R n/t

[diane in sf]

42. He must be dumb as shit to do this--why didn't he use a professional tax preparer?

There are always plenty of perfectly legal "expenses" that can be taken as deductions. He is either a deliberate tax cheat or so dumb he should be disbarred and tossed off the court. What a maroon. I hope this costs him his job (not likely, but I can hope).

[NICO9000]

56. I find it impossible to believe that he doesn't use one

A crooked professional tax preparer probably. Remember, only the little people pay taxes!

[DCKit]

137. It's not about the $$$$, it's where and whom the $$$$ came from. nt

[WinkyDink]

74. I'm going with "deliberate tax cheat" for $200, Alex.

[Starckers]

132. He paid

his taxes, but did not report.  Tim Geitner?  Those in power
get away with it.

[efhmc]

43. Nothing is ever going to happen to this incompentent

excuse for a human being. He is part of the majority of the court and protected from all harm.

[bertman]

44. One of The Privileged. What an asshole he is. Pure and unadulterated.

And we tolerate it.

I wonder when our Mubarak Moment will arrive.

[WinkyDink]

75. He got our "cowardice" number with his "high-tech lynching" canard. Now he's untouchable.

[chervilant]

101. It

had better be soon. Our global economy is disintegrating far faster than anticipated.

[Kurovski]

45. They have become so brazen that it's worrisome.

Or is that too genteel?

K&R.

[Enthusiast]

80. It's across the spectrum.

RW boldness. I think it is because they know full well that they have 30% of the population that will believe absolutely anything and they also thoroughly control the media. This is becoming more apparent every day.

[Kurovski]

138. Yes, the key is that people can see the manipulation, and filter news

through their own critical thinking.

[Festivito]

46. He's like a dog who caught his own tail, and, although he enjoys wagging it about...

..it just doesn't feel the same as when it wagged with happiness.

There he sits with blank eyes, having executed the winning grab only to be lost in the cognitive dissonance of all such unfulfilling vanities.

[dreamnightwind]

55. Hilarious

I don't think he ever wanted to be on the Supreme Court, he just went along with it because he was picked to serve by the ideologues. He has repeatedly stated that he'd rather be in private business.

But that was one funny post, loved it.

[Enthusiast]

81. Wow! Plus one...nt

[lobodons]

47. No Problem, Issa will be all over this

Issa will be all over this I am sure!! He is having like a million committee meetings on possible government officials misdeeds. Surely this will come up in one of them.

[UTUSN]

117. Bwah-ha-HAH !1 That's SAD laughter. n/t

[lonestarnot]

48. Nasty old lying fucker. Thinks he's above the law, because he probably is.

I hate him!

[Historic NY]

49. We need to have an impeachment.

[defendandprotect]

50. Clarence Thomas is a right wing pervert, placed their by the right wing to do their dirty work....

[gkhouston]

51. and Congress will knowingly, willfully do jack shit about it. n/t

[Solly Mack]

52. K&R

"...if one believes that even U.S. Supreme Court Justices are subject to the Rule of Law..."


Sadly....

[madmom]

53. So, what was it they just went after Charlie Rangel for?

[Starckers]

133. Not really

Rangel did not report, or pay taxes. Thomas paid taxes but did not report.

[kath]

54. How DARE anyone go after him - that would be a high-tech lynching, don'cha know?

[Tsiyu]

57. terminally unique

If any one of us did that, we'd be in prison


Richard Hatch, that Survivor dude got three years didn't he? For not paying taxes on one million bucks?

he should have become a judge instead....

[earcandle]

60. Whose job is it to serve him a subpoena to appear in court for his crimes?

Eric Holder?  

[Kablooie]

61. Do you think any Democrats would risk the wrath of the wright by seriously trying to impeach him?

It would become a war of major proportions.

I'm sure he broke the law and by all that is judicious and correct he should pay the same penalty any other citizen would for the same crime.

But he will be defended with wild, extended eyes and mouths blathered with foam by the conservatives .
They won't care one whit whether he broke the law or not. He's one of them and they will defend him to the death.

And how will you get the House to follow the rule of law and impeach him? I mean really.
They have no special loyalty to law or justice. They worship only their ideology. It will trump every other human value.

---

But I hope someone does.

[avaistheone1]

62. If a member of the Supreme Court can get away with this and keep his job

than the law, and the highest court of the land itself is a joke.


:kick:

[upi402]

63. Bush V. Gore

Yeppers!

[TatonkaJames]

64. Will something like this be our "Sputnik" moment one day ?

We know you or I would go directly to jail, do not pass go.
If he's reprimanded it brings us closer to their objective; a
two class system, one of which rules and the other obeys.

What will it take for us to begin marching like the Egyptians are today ?

[FailureToCommunicate]

91. March like an Egyptian! LOL!

[silenttigersong]

65. Bye BUH

Judge Thomas

[pam4water]

66. Got to love how the repuks can scream bloody murder about fake injustices and lie to cover their

own indiscretions.

[barbtries]

68. so, where do i go,

to whom do i appeal for justice and accountability on this issue?

[Demeter]

69. And this is a surprise?

[xchrom]

70. we are no longer a nation of laws. nt

[rasputin1952]

71. No USSC Justice has ever been impeached, however...

several Federal judges have, and been removed from the bench.

There is some serious precedent as to holding him accountable under impeachment and trial though; if for instance, the president of the US can be impeached for "lying" about a brief sexual encounter, 20 years of criminal "lying" on Federal Tax Forms should trump that by a mile and a half. Being a SC Justice, one would think he should be able to comprehend the possibility that he was committing a crime each time he signed the form omitting his wife's $120,000 income.

He can try and blame this on an accountant, but that's very thin ice indeed, regardless of who fills out the form, in the end, the individual is responsible for what went into and onto it.If they filed "married, filing separately", her income should be on file on a 1040 somewhere, but I'm betting they filed jointly and that's why he checked the box.

$50,000, and up to a year in prison, per incident makes this an extremely serious charge, actually, potentially 20 serious charges. Even if he pays all taxes, fines and costs, associated with for the back taxes, simply claiming ignorance of the law on his part would be enough to impeach and try him, removing him from the bench if convicted. This is more than an "Oops" moment, it is a sign of 20 years of deliberately ignoring the law, and if the digging starts, as I'm sure it will, other items might well pop up.

I doubt that an R run House would bring impeachment charges up, but this tarnishes an already tarnished reputation...he is one of the worst SC judges to ever sit on the bench, by far the dumbest.

I wonder if Issa will "demand" an investigation? Nah...criminals tend to stick together until the strain is untenable...;)

[WinkyDink]

76. Mr. and Mrs. Thomas were fully aware of their tax crimes. Let's not kid ourselves here.

[rasputin1952]

84. Oh yes, I can virtually guarantee they knew exactly what they were

doing...but it's more of a question of how it will be handled.

I watched the whole Thomas hearing way back before dirt...and I knew he was unqualified, (and probably an idiot, later proven by his actions), when he stated, "I haven't read the charges brought against me." What judge, much less a lawyer would refuse to read charges brought against them? Within an hour, he was on the "high tech lynching" line and playing the race card...it was the only tack he could take.

Like I said above, even if he tried to blame this on an an accountant, ultimately, under the law, the person(s), named at the top of the form are responsible for what is presented. He's as guilty as can be, the only way out is if they filed "married filing separately", and even then, the #'s better match up. I'm betting they filed jointly, that's why he's in deep with the IRS.

I'd love to see him roast. With few exceptions, (Taney comes to mind), I can think of very few less qualified people to sit on the USSC.

[NewJeffCT]

107. Samuel Chase was impeached in 1805, but not convicted

so, over 200 years ago.

Virginia Congressman John Randolph of Roanoke took up the challenge and took charge of the impeachment. The House of Representatives served Chase with eight articles of impeachment in late 1804, one of which involved Chase's handling of the trial of John Fries. Two more focused on his conduct in the political libel trial of James Callender. Four articles focused on procedural errors made during Chase's adjudication of various matters, and an eighth was directed at his “intemperate and inflammatory … peculiarly indecent and unbecoming … highly unwarrantable … highly indecent” remarks while "charging" or authorizing a Baltimore grand jury. The Jeffersonian Republicans-controlled United States Senate began the impeachment trial of Chase in early 1805, with Vice President Aaron Burr presiding and Randolph leading the prosecution.

All the counts involved Chase's work as a trial judge in lower circuit courts. (In that era, Supreme Court justices had the added duty of serving as individuals on circuit courts, a practice that was ended in the late 19th century.) The heart of the allegations was that political bias had led Chase to treat defendants and their counsel in a blatantly unfair manner. Chase's defense lawyers called the prosecution a political effort by his Republican enemies. In answer to the articles of impeachment, Chase argued that all of his actions had been motivated by adherence to precedent, judicial duty to restrain advocates from improper statements of law, and considerations of judicial efficiency.

The Senate voted to acquit Chase of all charges on March 1, 1805, and he returned to his duties on the court. He is the only U.S. Supreme Court justice to have been impeached.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Chase

[rasputin1952]

115. Thanks for the info...

I didn't realize they had additional duties as well.

One little thing though, he was impeached on lower court matters/infractions. But still, it would have been difficult at best to retain a seat on the SC if convicted on the lower court charges.

[Democat]

72. Democrats were too scared to filibuster Bush, you think they'll impeach?

Sure.

[WinkyDink]

73. That's usually called "being a criminal" and warrants something called "arrest". Waiting, waiting,..

[Enthusiast]

77. K&R

The guy actually believes in a two tiered justice system. Imagine being so detached from U.S. judicial history yet he sits on the highest court in the land..

[SpiralHawk]

78. The honorable citizens of the USA demand Thomas resign immediately

It's over, Mr. T.

[kentuck]

82. The Justice Dept has a responsibility to investigate it.

...and to prosecute if wrongdoing found. No one is above the law, including Clarence Thomas.

[underpants]

83. Wasn't "President Bartlett" impeached for lying on a form?

Yeah I know that was a fake TV show, but Thomas is a fake Supreme Court justice

[Hubert Flottz]

85. Laws are for the "Little People"

Not the rich and famous.

[Vinca]

96. Bingo!

A guy stealing a salami sandwich because he's starving will get jail time. Thomas gets to write an "Oops . . . sorry" and he's off the hook.

[WinkyDink]

86. A tax violation was a less-well-known-but-essential part of "Watergate."

[CanonRay]

87. Imagine the outcry if this were Sotomayor?

Rush would be screaming bloody murder.

[indimuse]

89. Handcuffs!

knr!!

[myrna minx]

90. Excellent report, Brad. K&R n/t

[Jakes Progress]

92. Dudes. If this administration won't prosecute

bush and cheney for illegally starting a war that as hilled hundreds of thousands and bankrupt a nation, what are the chances they will incur the nasty looks that boehner would give them over this. Now if we can just find a hard-working, liberal woman that we can quote out of context. Her we could pillory. But rich republicans. About a much chance of them being prosecuted as it was under bush. None.

[FailureToCommunicate]

114. +1 dude.

[spooked911]

94. they are all crooked as hell

this is the tip of the iceberg, I bet

[valerief]

97. Law is for the rabble. He's another tyrannical king who can do no wrong.

:grr:

[dotymed]

98. The Golden Rule.

He who has the gold (and his puppets) rule..........
Egypt is showing us the way, let's do it.........

[Uncle Joe]

99. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, BradBlog.

[CrispyQ]

100. Rule of Laws - plural. One law for them, a different law for us.

Our government is corrupt & rotten to the core. He may suffer a few mild recriminations but nothing will come of this.

[Jester Messiah]

102. Easiest way out:

Obama should offer him a pardon in exchange for stepping down. No fuss, no muss.

[Blue Owl]

103. I. M. P. E. A. C. H.

k&r

[disndat]

104. I know he is practically untouchable

on the other hand, this is a giant elephant in the living room that cannot be ignored.

[leveymg]

105. Funny how these things come back to bite you in the ass. Little things, like Perjury.

[ck4829]

108. K&R

[kestrel91316]

109. Impeach the bastard. If this isn't grounds, NOTHING is.

[AtLiberty]

110. K & R !!!

!!!

[Botany]

111. Oh Brad you are so quaint.

Judge Thomas bothered by the law? He sees himself as a law onto himself.
Hell he helped to stop the counting of American's votes because according to
Scalia the plaintiff (W bush), ran a good chance of being embarrassed if the
recount was allowed to procede.

[sulphurdunn]

112. Criminals don't let criminals

do time for their crimes.

[truebrit71]

113. Surely this has to be an impeachable offense??

...If not, why wouldn't everyone do it?

[RedCloud]

116. I bet he was born in Kenya too!

Just stirring the pot the opposite way for a change.

[paparush]

118. C'mon Beck. Pull out your chalk and blackboard and walk me through this one.

[MasonJar]

122. Impeach him.

[Major Hogwash]

123. Where the law is not enforced, there is no law.

Code of the Wild West.

Thomas will never be charged with a crime.

[Plucketeer]

125. Truly DISGUSTING!

This piece of shit should be wiped from the bench! :grr:

[pacalo]

127. Covering up conflicts of interests, possibly tax evasion; justices meeting with Republicans in

secrecy -- what these political zealots need is impeachment. Their Cheneyistic abuse of public office is a disgrace.

[earth mom]

128. Crooks-the lot of them!

:grr:

[creon]

129. Refer

Refer the matter to the appropriate US Attorney

[opihimoimoi]

136. For the Sake of SCOTUS being fair minded and objective..he needs removal...

[Toon Me Out]

139. jail!

he should share a cell with bernie madoff. he never will, tho'