Billionaire's gifts undermine the reputation of the Supreme Court.
It looks bad because it IS bad.
Senators Ron Wyden and Sheldon Whitehouse call for a Department of Justice special counsel to investigate Clarence Thomas
We want to make sure the truth gets out. And the heart of our request for a special counsel is a forgiven loan to Justice Thomas of more than a quarter million dollars to buy a 40-foot luxury motor coach. Our investigators at the Finance Committee found that Justice Thomas never repaid the principal on the loan, only interest. And the fella who gave him the money just stopped collecting payments altogether. This looks like the textbook definition of a forgiven loan.
Gifts and loans need to be reported promptly on ethics reports. Thomas failed to do that. A forgiven loan is "income" to the recipient. Taxes need to be paid on that income. They weren't. Justices have lifetime tenure during "good behavior." It isn't good behavior to break tax laws.
There are a diminishing number of American institutions that retain public trust. The public still generally trusts and respects officiating of major sports events, at least sufficiently that a whole array of sports betting takes place on the assumption that the games aren't rigged. Instant replay video of judgement-call decisions on fumbles, ball possession, and pass interference add to the credibility and consistency of decisions.
Imagine the uproar if it were known that Phil Knight made major private, undisclosed gifts to referees prior to an Oregon Duck football title game against Alabama. And imagine that in the game the referees made startling and controversial pro-Duck calls. The public would be justifiably outraged when news of Knight's gifts became public. A Supreme Court justice has enormous latitude to create a rule or make a distinction that bends the outcome of a case to meet a desired end. The consequences of their decisions are far more important that who gets a trophy and bragging rights.
I don't observe bi-partisan uproar over the gifts to Thomas. He has his defenders because they like the outcome of his decisions. He is sticking it to the liberals on issues of abortion, contraception, and homosexuality, and he is defending Donald Trump, leader of the GOP. Thomas may be corrupt, but he is THEIR corrupt guy. His GOP supporters who look the other way.
That is a short-sighted bargain.
This is another instance in which the real crime -- the real assault on American democracy -- is not prosecuted because it is a political crime, not a precise statutory one. But there is a prosecution sometimes, eventually, and it is on some "little" error. The "little error" is that Clarence Thomas should have paid taxes on a $250,000 forgiven loan that bought him a luxury motor coach. Some people cheat on their taxes and feel proud of themselves for getting away it. Tax cheating doesn't have the same social opprobrium as other crimes. In the great scheme of things, the stolen approximately $80,000 of unpaid taxes is a small thing.
Thomas' real crime -- the big thing -- is to have flouted the idea of equal justice and corrupted the Supreme Court. And then he corrupted the people who tolerate and minimize corruption because they value the direction of his decisions more than they value a court that dispenses equal justice, blind to the persons appearing before it. Double corruption: first the courts, then the people.
[Note: To get daily delivery of this blog to your emai go to: https://petersage.substack.com. Subscribe. Don't pay. The blog is free and always will be.]
6 comments:
It would be hard to get more unethical than the recent ruling by the GOP’s wingnut “justices” that their cult leader is above the law. Republicans are still celebrating that decision. They sure as hell aren’t going to support investigating them for lessor offenses.
Democrats should become the fair law and order party and emphasize it.
"Looks like" and "is" are not the same. Senator Wyden did not say conclusively that the money was cancellation of indebtedness as opposed to a gift. Let's keep our shirt on here. Many people give money to powerful people; powerful people socialize with one another, do each other favors, and exchange gifts. If you think this is necessarily wrong, you probably aren't one of these powerful people, or someone who patronizes powerful people. Anyhow, you and Senator Wyden are entitled to make a political point out of the loan or gift or whatever it is; you might be right that this is corruption, but the jury is out on that one; and I think your point is worth raising and I might be inclined to agree with you. This said, we have Joe Biden as much as George H.W. Bush to thank for Clarence Thomas; I listened to Anita Hill. How much money or other quid does it have to be before the quid becomes corruption? So many questions, so many problems for Diogenes.
The question isn't whether or not it was disclosed. It's whether or not it should have happened at all.
No oversight...
I never thought in my lifetime that a Supreme Court justice could be brought. Call me naive, but I’m kind of shocked. And disgusted.
I'm shocked, shocked to find gambling going on in this establishment
...here are your winnings sir.
Oh, thank you very much....
Post a Comment