LoveMyPeppermill
We turn each other's cranks
I agree with rareboy that it's not actually a mystery why the Supreme Court has for decades had a Justice who committed perjury in his confirmation hearings. (And now we have at least two.) It's appalling, but not mysterious. But I don't agree with rareboy as to the reason, which is not mere corruption.
All Congress knows that you need two-third of Senators present to vote to convict for an impeachment to actually remove someone from office. And for as long as Thomas has been a judge, there has been more than a third of the Senate that wants him there, voting the way he votes, and do not care that he perjured himself.
Just as they didn't care that Iran-Contra actually fit the Constitution's definition of treason, and that, therefore, Reagan and Poppy Bush committed treason against the United States.
(At best, some of those Republican Senators do care, but are too scared of losing a primary to act on their concern. Which is too bad, because they could probably convince voters how important it not to keep perjurers on the Supreme Court if they just took the trouble to make the case for it.)
I also disagree that impeaching and convicting the perjurers would damage the standing of the Supreme Court and the country. On the contrary, I think that actually holding the Justices to the standards that they're supposed to be governed by, and removing those who flout those standards, would increase the Supreme Court's standing -- and America's.
All Congress knows that you need two-third of Senators present to vote to convict for an impeachment to actually remove someone from office. And for as long as Thomas has been a judge, there has been more than a third of the Senate that wants him there, voting the way he votes, and do not care that he perjured himself.
Just as they didn't care that Iran-Contra actually fit the Constitution's definition of treason, and that, therefore, Reagan and Poppy Bush committed treason against the United States.
(At best, some of those Republican Senators do care, but are too scared of losing a primary to act on their concern. Which is too bad, because they could probably convince voters how important it not to keep perjurers on the Supreme Court if they just took the trouble to make the case for it.)
I also disagree that impeaching and convicting the perjurers would damage the standing of the Supreme Court and the country. On the contrary, I think that actually holding the Justices to the standards that they're supposed to be governed by, and removing those who flout those standards, would increase the Supreme Court's standing -- and America's.




































